All contents copyright Agknowledge®. All rights reserved.
The related bodies corporate, directors, and employees of Agknowledge® accept no liability whatsoever for any injury, loss, claim, damage, incidental or consequential damage, arising out of, or in any way connected with, the use of any information, or any error, omission or defect in the information contained in this publication. Whilst every care has been taken in the preparation of this publication Agknowledge® accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information supplied.
Contents
Export Growth Partnership 2021-25 Program Review 4
WA Wine Export Growth Partnership Program Stakeholder Overview 16
Summary of the Stakeholder Consultations 17
Areas to consider for the new Industry Growth Partnership program 20
WA Wine Industry EGP Review Questionnaire 23
WA Wine Export Growth Partnership Program Review - Stakeholder Responses 25
1. What region do you represent? 26
2. How long Exporting? 26
3. EGP engagement is achieving the stated aims 27
4. What EGP programs have you participated in this FY (2024/25)? 31
5. Has participation with EGP supported your efforts in the targeted market? 50
6. Prospective countries to target for export 56
7. EGP aligned wine producer efforts with market development activities and leveraged funds 57
8. What would WA wine exports look like if the WA Wines to the World did not exist? 59
9. Can you please identify the importance of the International Sales Channels 62
10. Can you please identify the importance of the Domestic Sales Channels 63
11. Is collection and provision of domestic sales data an important factor? 64
12. Prioritise the domestic markets 67
13. Potential activities and services to develop the domestic marketing strategy 68
14. Which marketing activities interest you most in Export markets? 70
The Authors 75
Export Growth Partnership 2021-25 Program Review
Background
The Export Growth Partnership (EGP) is a five-year co-funded partnership between the WA wine industry and the WA state government, who have each contributed $3 million to support the program which aims to increase the profitability of the WA wine industry by:
1. Growing the average value and volume of WA wines exported.
2. Growing the number of WA wine producers successfully participating in export markets.
3. Aligning investment in international wine marketing, promotion, media and wine tourism to maximise profile and sales outcomes for WA fine wines.
In 2024 Wines of Western Australia developed the WA Wine Industry Strategic Plan 2024-2034.
The key market driven goals of the plan aim to drive sales to expand domestic and international markets through growth in value, diversification of markets, and growth in premium wine sales targeting:
• Export markets comprise 15 per cent of total production
• Export sales average of $15 per bottle free on board (FOB)
• Increase the market share, value, and volume of domestic fine wine sales in Australia by 2 per cent plus CPI per annum (wholesale and direct to consumer).
The WA state government and the WA wine industry have agreed to extend the current Export Growth Partnership (EGP) funding agreement for a further four years from 1 July 2025. This funding agreement for an Industry Growth Partnership (IGP) will have a broader remit to support the strategic goals outlined in the WA Wine Industry Strategic Plan 2024-2034
The funding amount has been increased to $6 million each over four years (2025-29).
The 2021-24 EGP was delivered as a new program titled WA Wines to the World under the guidance of an Industry Steering Group (ISG) which has worked with Hydra Consulting through its key consultants Dr Darren Oemcke and Liz Mencel to provide the function of program management. This work has included:
• Ongoing support and reporting to the Industry Steering Group (ISG) and working collaboratively on developing and reviewing activations.
• Delivering a 5-year framework for the program.
• Ongoing direct engagement with regions, producers and potential new participants in the program and working to increase participation and engagement.
• Marketing of the various activations under the commercially viable model that has been adopted for the program including via direct targeting, EDM and social media.
• Supporting WoWA in meeting its reporting commitments.
• Undertaking international market research to identify opportunities to best position Western Australian wines globally.
• Ongoing liaison with Wine Australia and Australian Grape and Wine to position the WA program within national efforts.
• Delivering a capability development program. It is intended that the 2025 IGP will continually build industry capability and self-reliance, and industry resourcing at regional and state level are essential to the success of the partnership. Support for regions and producers to continually build skills and capacity should aim to build self-reliance and resilience into the future.
Executive Summary
The Export Growth Partnership (EGP) 2021–25 is a co-funded initiative between the Western Australian (WA) wine industry and the WA State Government, each contributing $3 million, aimed at increasing the profitability and global presence of WA wines. The program’s objectives are to grow export volume and value, expand the number of exporting producers, and align marketing and promotional investments to maximize the profile and sales of WA fine wines internationally and domestically. Since its inception, the EGP has contributed to measurable improvements:
• Export Growth: WA wine exportsincreased by 29.27% in volume (to 5.3 million litres) and 20.65% in value (to $44.4 million) from July 2021 to March 2025, outperforming other major Australian wine regions.
• Market Diversification: WA’s strategy to diversify export markets has reduced risk and captured new opportunities, with strong growth in China, the UK, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan.
• Premium Positioning: The average value per litre for WA bottled wine rose to $12.67, reflecting a focus on premium and fine wine segments.
• Industry Participation: The number of WA wineries participating in export markets increased from 166 to 177.
• Collaboration and Capability: The EGP has fostered greater collaboration among regions, producers, and government partners, while building industry capability and self-reliance. Key challenges remain, including global economic headwinds, declining wine consumption in some markets, and the need to sustain momentum in North America. However, the removal of China’s tariffs in 2024 and ongoing government-industry collaboration provide new growth opportunities. The EGP’s success has led to an expanded funding commitment of $12 million over for the next four years (2025–29), with a broader remit under the Industry Growth Partnership (IGP). The IGP, a new
iteration of the program, aims to expand its focus by incorporating domestic market strategies, and investment in building sustainability of the WA Wine Industry.
In April 2025 Wines of WA contracted Agknowledge® to review the operation of the EGP program and to engage with wine producers to assess industry engagement and the perceived value of the EGP to date, and then provide feedback to the IGP on how to improve engagement and alignment of EGP activities to address industry needs and expectations.
While not specifically targeted in the review, special mention must be made around the significant contribution to the governance, direction, and monitoring of the program by the ISG. The combination of the wine industry, regional representatives, and government participation all ‘leaned- in’ to the program to guide and pivot according to global impacts and developing initiatives. The continuation of a relevant skills and governance based steering group will be a key factor in future success.
The program has been reviewed using information and reports provided by Wines of Western Australia, Hydra Consulting and Wine Australia Export Reporting. The Industry Engagement Report is also structured around in-depth interviews with 20 respondents who represent the various wine growing regions in WA, and were interviewed to provide feedback on the WA Wine industry Export Growth Partnership (EGP) program and their views on the new Industry Growth Partnership (IPG) which will focus on both the export and domestic market.
This market research on behalf of Wines of WA (WoWA) contributes to the review of the Export Growth Partnership (EGP) and provides input into the development of the new Industry Growth Partnership (IGP) to ensure the strategic direction and implementation of the program is addressing industry needs to increase profitability and resilience at a business and industry level.
Key Recommendations
1. Strengthen Premium and Fine Wine Positioning
• Build on WA’s reputation for premium wines by focusing marketing and export development on high-value segments and leveraging regional provenance stories to attract discerning consumers.
2. Continue and Expand Market Diversification
• Maintain and enhance efforts to diversify export markets to reduce reliance on any single region, especially given the volatility in global trade and changing consumption patterns.
• Focus on High-Growth Markets by concentrating export efforts on Southeast Asia, China post-tariff removal, Japan, the UK, and targeted promotional activities in challenging but high-potential markets like North America where demand for premium WA wines aligns with market trends.
3. Enhanced Domestic Marketing Strategy
• Invest in East Coast markets (NSW, Victoria, Queensland) with targeted trade and consumer events to increase visibility and loyalty for WA wines.
4. Leverage Inbound and Outbound Trade Initiatives
• Expand support for participation in international trade shows, in-market activations, and inbound trade/media visits, which have proven effective in driving sales and building relationships.
• Streamline Inbound Trade Visits to improve due diligence on invitees to ensure genuine buyers and key decision-makers are involved. Curate experiences to showcase regional diversity effectively.
These recommendations are designed to build on the EGP’s successes, address ongoing challenges, and position the WA wine industry for sustainable growth in both domestic and international markets as outlined in the WA Wine Industry Strategic Plan 2024-2034.
5. Support Regional and Producer Collaboration
• Foster ongoing collaboration between regions, producers, and aligned partners (e.g., tourism, food sectors) to amplify the impact of marketing, storytelling, and export development efforts.
• Inclusive Regional Participation by broadening the program’s scope to ensure smaller wine regions and producers outside Margaret River and Great Southern are equally represented in marketing and export activities.
6. Increase Industry Capability and Self-Reliance
• Invest in ongoing capability development programs for producers and regional associations, aiming to build skills, resilience, and self-reliance across the industry.
• Develop training initiatives for industry professionals, including Australian sommeliers and international wine reviewers, to create informed ambassadors for WA wines.
7. Enhance Collaboration with Government and National Bodies
• Continue to align state and national resources, working closely with agencies like Austrade, DPIRD, and Tourism WA, leveraging collective resources to amplify impact in both domestic and international markets.
• Foster links between wine promotion and regional tourism to build WA’s destination appeal through bookable wine experiences and collaboration with local food and accommodation sectors
8. Monitor and Refine Program Delivery
• Regularly review the effectiveness and efficiency of program management, reporting, and fund disbursement processes to ensure timely and impactful delivery of initiatives.
• Implement robust post-event follow-up processes to capture and share outcomes, such as sales, partnerships, and market feedback, enhancing transparency and learning.
Beulah Wines. Blackwood Valley Wine Region, Boyup Brook. Source: Scoop WoWA
Wine Export Growth Partnership Evaluation
In April 2025 Wines of WA contracted Agknowledge® to review the operation of the EGP program and to engage with wine producers to assess industry engagement and the perceived value of the EGP to date, and then provide feedback to the IGP on how to improve engagement and alignment of EGP activities to address industry needs and expectations. The following section has been reviewed using information and reports provided by Wines of Western Australia, Hydra Consulting and Wine Australia Export Reporting.
A Monitoring and Evaluation Plan was established to track the performance of the WA Wine Export Growth Partnership over the 2021-2025 program.
Comparative Program Key Performance Analysis for Australian Peer Regions to March 2025 Export Growth Partnership 2021-25 Program Review and Future Delivery Opportunities for Wines of Western Australia I May 2025
The WA wine industry has set medium and longterm goals to increase the volume, value, and value per unit of wine exported while also building market diversification. The overarching strategic rationale for this is to develop market demand which will support further industry development. Increased market demand will give wine producers the confidence to invest in growth and innovation and the economic basis to access finance to do so.
The focus of the EGP in 2023-24 was a continuation of in-market activations and in-bound trade and media visits and retail and distributor in-market support programs. This was the first full financial year of the program not affected by COVID border restrictions.
Compared to all other states and nationally, WA has performed better in export markets since the EGP program began in June 2021 across the following program KPIs:
• Aggregated volume: WA increased 29.27% to 5.3 million litres which is 13% of state production. Victoria and NSW are still down on June 2021 and export a smaller percentage of state production at 6% and 3% respectively. SA has increased volume by 16.2% and exports 24% of state production. Note these figures are based on
product that is exported under a state GI. Most of SE Australia fruit is exported under Australia or SE Australia GI.
• Aggregated value: WA increased by 20.7% to $44.4 million and the states national share of value increased by 1.71% to 19.8%.
• Value per litre for bottled wine: WA increased by 4.6% to $12.62 per litre. Victoria decreased by -19.99% to $11.21/litre. NSW increased by 14.3% to $7.32/litre and SA by 18.4% to $18.67/litre.
WA and SA continue to set the trend for export of premium wine noting SA has Treasury Wine Estates (TWE) which manages the Penfolds brand. This contributes significantly to SA’s performance. WA is largely comprised of exporters who are privately owned, family businesses. While TWE has a small footprint in WA under the Devils Lair label, this is primarily a domestic brand. Much of the WA fruit processed by TWE is blended into SA or Australian labelled brands if not utilised in Devils Lair brands.
Despite this, WA has still outperformed SA on the metrics of aggregated volume and value. The value per litre metric is significantly supported in SA by TWE and Penfolds specifically.
It is also worth noting that WA represents 3-4% of national production annually (dependent on vintage conditions) processing 5.3m litres of wine compared to SA (116m litres), NSW (9.8m litres) and Victoria (11.3m litres). Both Victoria and NSW export significant amounts of production as bulk wine at very low price points ($1.21 and $1.02 respectively). WA’s aggregated value is a result of a focus on premium price positioning underpinned by regional and state market development programs that support this.
The TWE model for premium/luxury brand development provides a good template for WA in both domestic and international markets for future market development programs.
Wine Australia Export Dashboard for Western Australia - Export Dashboard
December 2021
March 2025
Challenges in 2023-24 included ongoing worsening economic conditions across all markets, reducing consumer discretionary spend. Additionally, a trend towards reduced alcohol consumption internationally has seen wine sales in all markets decrease (IWSR seven key trends that will shape the global wine industry in 2024).
On a positive note, China removed tariffs on Australian wine in April 2024. Additionally, the trend towards purchasing higher value wine aligned to discerning consumption suits Western Australia’s fine and premium wine positioning. To harness this opportunity requires consistent and innovative market development activity such as that supported by the Export Growth Partnership.
For all Australian exporting wine producers, without China sales from April-June 2024, financial year 2023-24 would have shown decline (-3.7% across all markets) compared to 2022-23. With China included aggregated sales increased 17.3%. For Western Australia, without China, aggregated sales in 2023-24 increased 3.6% compared to 2022-23
Destination Markets 2021 Compared to 2025
and 8% with China included. This shows that WA’s focus on market diversification continues to spread risk and capture opportunities. Additionally, WA’s average value per litre in China at 30 June 2024 was $10.43, an increase of 14% on 30 June 2021 ($9.14).
The other WA wine export markets of the UK (23%), Singapore (7%), Hong Kong (82%) and Japan (33%) all increased compared to 30 June 2023 while the USA (-14.5%) and Canada (-17.5%) declined. In these markets, Australia has declined in the UK, Singapore, Japan, USA, and Canada again showing the success of WA’s market diversification strategy.
North America remains a challenging market generally but with significant potential upside. The EGP Industry Steering Committee (ISC) determined in 2023-24 to resource activities in the USA and Texas specifically with promotional and sales activation programs implemented or scheduled for 2024-25. Anecdotally, some producers are now seeing further distributor interest. Industry will wait to see the impact of the new ‘tariff regime’ proposed by the Trump administration in 2025.
(Source: Wine Australia Wine Export Dashboard - Export Dashboard)
WA
WA’s two major exporting wine regions have also performed above most Australian regions. Compared to 2021, the Great Southern has increased its value share of national exports by 18.7% and Margaret River increased by 5.8%. In comparison, the Barossa Valley dropped by 10% and the Yarra Valley by 19%. The Great Southern has also increased aggregated value by 2.3% and average price per litre for both bottled (5.2%) and bulk (26.8%). Margaret River has increased average price per litre for both bottled (13.9%) and bulk (5.4%).
International wine purchasing trends show continuing opportunities for fine and premium wine such as that produced in WA (Wine Australia Market Insights Report 12 June 2024). Projected trends point to higher price point products which are supported by regional provenance stories. The work being supported by the EGP focuses firmly on this. Regional provenance stories work in all markets for fine wine, including Australian domestic markets. The activations, regional collateral and regional collaboration created through the EGP are building capacity and resilience in-region. This will support not only export market development but also regional tourism market development and domestic wholesale. Also important to consider is the value of entering new markets such as India off the base of a well-developed fine and premium wine narrative that has been consistently supported across all existing markets.
Western
Australia Price Segments 2021 to 2025
(Source: Wine Australia Wine Export Dashboard - Export Dashboard)
In 2023-24 attendance at international trade shows exceeded pre-COVID levels as did in-bound visitation from international trade and media. This is a result of support from the EGP. The delivery of these improves with each iteration as program partners learn how to work together more effectively. The willingness to work collaboratively across wine regions and with a range of state and federal government agency partners has increased because of the EGP and the centralising of strategic planning and execution through the contracted consultant (Hydra Consulting). As the program has continued, this capacity and capability has grown in region, developing ongoing self-reliance and resilience to compliment the willingness to collaborate.
1. Has the expenditure profile of the partnership matched the requirements of the agreement?
The expenditure profile of the partnership aligns with the requirements of the agreement. At 30 June 2025 total program expenditure is projected to be $6,622,924 with $3,761,605 (56%) co-contributions and $2,861,319 as EGP funds (44%). (Note: these amounts do not include $225,000 EGP funding allocated to the RDE Provenance Project.)
2. Are there efficient processes in place to ensure the timely assessment and disbursement of funds to participating organisations?
Presently the agreement milestone schedule is the resource to manage assessment and distribution processes. Wines of WA continues to work with DPIRD to further refine this to ensure the work required to produce reports is scheduled appropriately.
Key performance indicator Results
Administration cost ratio –partnership funds required to administer the activities of the partnership each year as share of the total budget provided
Timeliness indicator –timeliness of reporting against agreement milestones
In 2024-25 the estimated breakdown is:
• Services - $930,550 or 97%
• Administration - $30,000 or 3%
In 2023-24 there were no significant timeliness issues related to reporting against agreement milestones.
Effectiveness Monitoring
3. What activities have been most effective in achieving the stated outcomes of the agreement?
Programs focused on driving consumer sales that started towards the end of 2021-22 did result in new orders from distributors. These types of activations increased in 2024-25. The programs supported retail and distributor activations in-market, driving sales and stock depletions. These were implemented in the UK, Hong Kong, China, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, and the USA.
Participation in trade fairs (Prowein in Germany and Vin Expo in Hong Kong) were supported by the EGP and producer/stakeholder co-contributions resulting in significant representation by WA producers. Margaret River regional stands were supported,
including masterclasses that were well attended at both fairs. Additionally, the EGP supported the Wine Australia China Roadshow to drive re-engagement in-market with trade and consumers.
In-bound visits to regions have also been well supported by producers. Both the Great Southern and Margaret River have supported regional visits, working with aligned regional partners (food producers and tourism/hospitality).
4. Has the real value of wine exports increased over the assessment period?
The real value of WA wine exports ($42.2million) is 14.7% higher than the starting point of 1 July 2021 ($32 million). (Wine Australia Export Approval Report to 30 June 2024)
5. Has the volume of wine exports increased over the assessment period?
The volume of WA wine exported has increased by 19.5% to 4.9 million litres relative to the starting point of 1 July 2021. (Wine Australia Export Approval Report to 30 June 2024)
6. Has the participation of wineries in export markets increased?
At 31 December 2024 participation numbers in export markets increased to 177 wineries, exceeding the starting point of 166 wineries at 1 July 2021 for the first time since the program started. (Wine Australia Export Approval Report to 30 June 2024)
7. What additional investment has the Government’s investment in the partnership achieved?
An additional investment of $3.76 million has been contributed by WA wine producers and stakeholder partners. This represents 56% of the total program expenditure to 30 June 2024.
8. Did the partnership align state and national resources aimed at international wine marketing?
Most activations this year involved partnerships with state and/or federal resources including Austrade, Wine Australia, WA Trade offices (Austin, London, Singapore, Shanghai and Tokyo), Tourism WA and the South West Development Commission, Great Southern Development Commission and Australia’s South West and commercial partners including the WA Good Food Guide and the International Wine and Spirits Competition.
Key performance indicator Results (31 December 2024 vs 1 July 2021)
The real value of wine exports each year by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties) by market destination.
The percentage growth in the real value of wine exports each year by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties) by market destination
Aggregated value across all markets was up 14.7% from July 2021 at $42.2 million.
Bottled wine shipments increased by 7% to $34.9 million.
Bulk wine shipments increased by 60% to $7.2 million which is attributed to an increase in shipment to the UK.
Aggregated total value across the top 6 markets increased by 20% to $32.4 million. By Market:
• UK increased by 18% to $13 million.
• China increased by 198% to $10.4 million.
• US decreased by 8% to $3.2 million.
• Singapore increased by 9% to $3.2 million.
• Canada decreased by 43% to $1.3 million.
• Japan increased by 6% to $1.05 million.
• Hong Kong decreased by 43% to $1.3 million.
Aggregated total value across the top 5 varieties increased by 20% to $32.4 million. By variety:
• Cabernet Sauvignon decreased by 12% to $10.4 million.
• Chardonnay increased by 20% to $9.5 million.
• Shiraz increased by 92% to $11 million.
• Sauvignon Blanc and blends increased by 75% to $5.6 million.
• Riesling increased by 33% to $1.2 million
The total real value of wine exports each year as a share of total Australian wine exports
The real price per unit (PPU) of exported wine by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties)
The percentage growth in the real price per unit of exported wine by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties)
The total real value of WA wine exports as a share of total Australian exports increased by 17% from 1.42% in July 2021 to 1.66% in July 2024.
The PPU decreased 6% to $8.58 for all wine exported.
The PPU for bottled wine increased by 5% to $12.73.
The PPU for bulk wine decreased by 2.4% to $3.23.
The PPU for top varieties were:
• Cabernet Sauvignon increased 4.2% to $12.64.
• Chardonnay increased 24.5% to $15.83.
• Shiraz and increased 15.5 % to $6.68.
• Sauvignon Blanc and blends decreased 5% to $7.91.
• Riesling increased by 1.4% to 9.76.
The volume of wine exports each year by type (bottled, bulk, and top 5 varieties) by market destination
The total volume of wine exports each year as a share of total WA production
The total volume of wine exports each year as a share of total Australian wine exports
Aggregated number of exporting wineries
The value of any contributions by wine producers and parties external to DPIRD.
The volume of all wine exported to all markets increased by 22% to 4.9 million litres.
The volume of bottled wine exported to all markets remained steady at 2.7 million litres.
The volume of bulk wine exported to all markets increased by 57% to 2.2 million litres.
In 2024-25 the total volume of wine exported by WA (4.9 million litres) as a share of total production (35 million litres) was 12%.
The total real volume of WA wine exports as a share of total Australian wine exports increased slightly to 0.8%.
The aggregated number of wineries exporting increased slightly from 166 in June 2021 to 170 in December 2024.
An additional investment of $3.7million has been contributed by Western Australian wine producers and stakeholder partners.
WA wine producers interested in investing in export activities (whether small, medium, or large) can join the WA Wines to the World program, as have regional wine associations. There is no cost to join until producers and regions are ready to make decisions about specific market activations they wish to engage in. The program will co-fund 50% across all identified market activations. WA wine producers who are part of the WA Wines to the World program can access information sessions and resources, and participate in activations.
The focus of the EGP has been in-market activations and in-bound trade and media visits and retail and distributor in-market support programs. 2024 was the first full year of the program not affected by COVID border restrictions.
WA Wines to the World: Calander of Activations – 2024-25
Wines to the World: Calendar
WA Wines to the World: Calendar of
Participation
A review of individual wineries who participated in the program to date revealed a list of 150 active investors who contributed of $3.8m over the 4 years of the program. The chart below also shows that 55 wineries contributed more than $5,000 funds to the program
EGP Producer Spend > $5,000 over the 4 year period
$50,000
$40,000
$30,000
$20,000
$10,000
$0
$60,000 Howard Park/Madfish Vasse Felix / Heytesbury Xanadu Wines Frankland Estate Wines Periscope WA Churchview Estate Cape Mentelle Vinaceous Wines St Johns Wine Alkoomi Wines Voyager Estate Overstory McHenry Hohnen Vintners Ferngrove Plantagenet Wines Singlefile Wines Small Things Wine Credaro Wines Swinney West Cape Howe Lenton Brae Rosenthal Chalari Wines Fogarty Wine Group Fishbone Wines & HRE Capel Vale Wines Flametree Wines Wines of Merritt Vino Volta Domaine Naturaliste Xabregas Nikola Estate Stella Bella Wines Byron and Harold Cullen Wines Cape Landing Pty Ltd Lange Estate Juniper Estate Forest Hill Vineyard Moss Brothers Cherubino Wines Dukes Vineyard Morlet of Margaret River L.A.S. Vino Happs Wines Snake and Herring Marron
Producer/Winery EGP Producer Spend > $5,000 over the 4 year period
(Source: WA Wines to the World program Monitoring.)
Note: both Howard Park and Vasse Felix invested significantly more than the graph limit of $60,000.
All contributors
The EGP was available to co-investors beyond individual Wineries and so other funding sources including the significant input in-kind by producer. This includes travel expenses to in market events, contribution of wines for sampling and give aways at major activations. The 2 major associations of Margaret River and the Great Southern were able to raise further contributions from regional organisations such as their respective Development Commissions to continue to regional inbound and in market activities. The federal program Export Market Development Grant was also activated by the WA Wines to the World investment.
The graphs below show the top 10 contributors for both 2024-25, and the 4 years of the program.
WA Wines to the World 2024-25 - Top 10 Contributors (all types incl producers)
Producers/Regions In-kind
Margaret River Wine Association
Wine Australia
Producers/Regions In-kind
Howard Park/Madfish
Margaret River Wine Association
Austrade (incl TradeStart)
Wine Australia
Great Southern Wine Producers Association
Howard Park/Madfish
Vasse Felix / Heytesbury
Austrade (incl TradeStart)
Wines of Western Australia (EMDG)
Great Southern Wine Producers Association
Xanadu Wines (Rathbone Wine Group)
Vasse Felix / Heytesbury
Vinaceous Wines
Wines of Western Australia (EMDG)
Xanadu Wines (Rathbone Wine Group)
Vinaceous Wines
WA Wines to the World 4 YEARS - Top 10 Contributors (all types incl producers)
Producers/Regions In-kind
Wine Australia
Margaret River Wine Association
Producers/Regions In-kind
Austrade (incl TradeStart)
Wine Australia
Great Southern Wine Producers Association
Margaret River Wine Association
Howard Park/Madfish
Austrade (incl TradeStart)
Wines of Western Australia (EMDG)
Great Southern Wine Producers Association
Vasse Felix / Heytesbury
Howard Park/Madfish
WA Good Food Guide
Xanadu Wines
Wines of Western Australia (EMDG)
Vasse Felix / Heytesbury
WA Good Food Guide
Xanadu Wines
Investment by producers
The investment made by the top 10 producers over the 4 years and compared to the 2024-25 financial year show some movement as the years progressed with new entrants accessing the program and the successive maturing of WA Wines to the World from initial education to a deep immersion in trade.
Spend by Region
The spend over the four years and compared to the recent 2024-25 year has remained consistent by percentage with Margaret River comprising 52% of the program, the Great Southern 28%, and Multi-regional spend the remainder 20%. This is reasonably consistent with volume/ tonnage of production for each region. However it does lead the smaller regions to question how to realise opportunities without having similar resources.
WA Wines to the World 2024-25 Producer & Regional Spend by region of origin
WA Wines
WA Wines to the World 4 YEARS Producer & Regional Spend by region of origin
to the World 2024-25 - Top 10 Producers
Howard Park/Madfish
Vasse Felix / Heytesbury
Howard Park/Madfish
Xanadu Wines (Rathbone Wine Group)
Vasse Felix / Heytesbury
Vinaceous Wines
Xanadu Wines (Rathbone Wine Group)
Frankland Estate Wines
Vinaceous Wines
Alkoomi Wines
Frankland Estate Wines
Alkoomi Wines
Rosenthal Credaro Wines
Credaro Wines
McHenry Hohnen Vintners
Rosenthal
Churchview Estate
McHenry Hohnen Vintners
Churchview Estate
WA Wines to the World 4 YEARS
- Top 10 Producers
Howard Park/Madfish
Vasse Felix / Heytesbury
Howard Park/Madfish
Xanadu Wines (Rathbone Wine Group)
Vasse Felix / Heytesbury
Frankland Estate Wines
Xanadu Wines (Rathbone Wine Group)
Frankland Estate Wines
Churchview Estate Periscope WA
Periscope WA
Cape Mentelle
Churchview Estate
Vinaceous Wines
Cape Mentelle
St Johns Wine
Vinaceous Wines
Alkoomi Wines
St Johns Wine
Alkoomi Wines
Share of production by region
International investment
The investment in the international market has been truly global as indicated in the Calendar of Activation. The graph below shows the percentage of funds invested in each of the in market regions.
WA Wines to the World 2024-25 - Spend by Market
WA Wine Export Growth Partnership Program Stakeholder Overview
In the next stage of the EGP Review Agknowledge® engaged with wine producers and stakeholders to assess industry engagement and the perceived value of the EGP to date, and provide qualitative feedback to the ISG on how to improve engagement and alignment of future IGP activities to address industry needs and expectations.
The following report was developed using a structured telephone interview format which was formulated using information from previous reviews (conducted in 2022 and 2023) and in conjunction with Hydra Consulting included questions to identify future export market requirements.
This market research on behalf of Wines of WA (WoWA) contributes to the review of the Export Growth Partnership (EGP) and provides input into the development of the new Industry Growth Partnership (IGP) to ensure the strategic direction and implementation of the program is addressing industry needs to increase profitability and resilience at a business and industry level. The new IGP market focus will be on the following areas:
• Capability and capacity building - workshops and programs to assist producers.
• Supply/demand data - current data for domestic and international markets.
• WA focused programs to re-engage consumers;
• Intrastate - customer and consumer engagement programs.
• Interstate - customer and consumer engagement programs.
• International - international customer and consumer engagement programs.
Respondents Interviewed
For this report 20 respondents were interviewed to provide feedback on the WA Wine industry Export Growth Partnership (EGP) program and their views on the new Industry Growth Partnership (IPG) which will focus on both the export and domestic market.
The respondents included 15 producers were selected to cover regions, scale, and operations. The majority had wine operations in the Margaret River region followed closely by the Great Southern. Other regions included Blackwood, Geographe, Southern Forests and Swan Valley. A further 5 stakeholders were also interviewed whose organisations are closely aligned with the EGP.
Regions represented in the producer interviews
Each respondent interviewed has been identified in the report with a number and where appropriate the number is aligned to their respective comments so readers can either follow the overall theme or an individual conversation.
It is with special thanks that the Producers and Stakeholders interviewed were generous and expansive with their time and expertise to ensure the information provided will deliver sound guidance to the next IGP.
Swan
Blackwood
Great
Summary of the Stakeholder Consultations
The wine producer consultation interviews clearly identified that the EGP program is proving to be effective in helping WA wine producers to grow wine exports and while there were some criticisms of the program, these can easily be addressed moving forward. Conversations with program producer participants and stakeholders highlighted the following:
Overview
Collaboration with ASW, & TWA
Funding for on-ground projects andregional activities
Interstate domestic marketing and promotion
Reliable market and consumer data and analysis
Further regional accommodation, food, & tourism
• Prior to 2021 the percentage of the interviewees’ individual wine production exported averaged 16 to 11%. While their exports dropped marginally to an average of 14% in 2024, producers aspire to increase exports to an average of 28% of their production over the coming 4 years.
Intrastate domestic marketing and promotion
Assistance with development of ‘Bookable experiences
Communication of relevant industry events and activities
Support for regional wine shows and/or awards
Assist producers to find and work with distributors
• More than half of the respondents believe the EGP program is achieving some of its stated aims from a company perspective as it is contributing to business growth and facilitating market access, despite current global economic challenges.
Collaboration with ASW, & TWA
Funding for on-ground projects andregional activities
Interstate domestic marketing and promotion
• Concerns were expressed about gaps in support, limited participation opportunities for regions outside of Margaret River and Great Southern, and challenges in aligning with their specific business needs.
Reliable market and consumer data and analysis
Further regional accommodation, food, & tourism
Intrastate
Assistance
Communication
• The EGP is viewed as more successful from an industry perspective and then the individual business perspective.
Support
Assist producers to find and work with distributors
EGP engagement is achieving the stated aims
• From a WA wine industry perspective, the program was viewed as more successful as it has helped unify the industry and improve visibility in international markets. It was mentioned that growth has been uneven across different regions.
• From a regional perspective, stakeholders acknowledge the program has strengthened certain wine producing regions and fostered a more unified approach to market representation.
Distributor - WA
National retail chains –direct chain relationships
Distributor - Interstate
Direct wholesale –salesperson/agent
Other DTC –events, online, ecom,
Cellar door & wine club
• The most popular EGP activity in the past financial year was ’Inbound trade visits’ followed by ‘Trade fairs and roadshows’ and ‘Regionally and portfolio-led projects’. The least popular was the ‘New exporter workshops and coaching’ however this initiative does have a limited audience.
EGP programs participated in FY 2024/25
Inbound trade visits
Distributor - WA
Trade fairs and roadshows
National retail chains –direct chain relationships
Regionally and portfolio led projects
Distributor - Interstate
US sommelier competition
Wine Blast visit and podcast
Direct wholesale –salesperson/agent
Wine Connection retail promotion
Producer led projects
Cellar door & wine club Other DTC –events, online, ecom,
New exporter workshops & coaching
Inbound trade visits
by Respondents
• The new exporter workshops and coaching are invaluable for producers new to export and provide great support and one on one mentoring and are seen as crucial for growing WA’s exporter base.
Regionally and portfolio
projects Trade fairs and roadshows
• New to market programs exclude producers who are already in that particular market but have the capacity to further grow the market.
• Not all export growth is attributed to the EGP, as many individual wineries already have established export markets and distributors.
• The strongest export sales channels for producers currently are Off premise – chain (wine/ speciality); Off premise – independent; On premise – independent and On premise –chain. The strongest growth is for on premise –independent and off premise - independent.
• Inbound trade and media visits are valued by producers as they provide an opportunity to showcase regions, develop more meaningful relationships and are more cost effective.
• Producers value recognised wine reviewers as they believe ratings translate directly to increased sales.
• Producers identified the most successful export activities as those that combined targeted market engagement, buyer education, and strong follow-up particularly the UK retail promotions, Asia On/Off Trade Program, Wine Connection retail campaigns, and inbound buyer visits, which led to tangible sales and lasting relationships.
• The EGP has laid a solid foundation for growth and success is reflected in improved market access, brand awareness, new distributors, relationship development with media and trade, and some sales.
• Without the EGP, the industry believes WA wine exports would be weaker, more fragmented, and reliant on larger producers, leaving smaller wineries without essential export market support.
Limitations of the EGP
• The EGP has been seen as more beneficial for the Margaret River and Great Southern wine regions which have resources in their local wine industry associations and have had strong support from stakeholders based in the regions who have invested in EGP activities.
• Producers outside of the Margaret River and Great Southern regions have felt excluded from the program and unable to participate in many activities or access funding to assist in export.
• Concern was raised that inbound activities are regionally biased and other wine regions and smaller producers miss the opportunity to be involved.
• There is also concern that inbound trade are not ‘fair dinkum’ buyers and that they are on a junket at the expense of the industry.
• Feedback and follow up on activations is limited, producers would like to know the outcomes of trade visits and events and if it resulted in sales or new partnerships.
• Less successful activities included events with poor follow-up or limited buyer engagement (e.g. in Thailand, Germany and Canada), and those with insufficient financial support relative to their cost, and which didn’t result in measurable sales outcomes.
• Some concerns were raised about the EGP being outsourced to external consultants with concern that industry risks losing access to markets, intellectual property, trade relationships, networks, and skills are not being built up internally within the industry.
Communication
• WA Wines to the World and Wines of WA are viewed as effective in communicating information.
• Feedback was largely positive about Hydra’s delivery of the EGP program, praising strong communication, organisation, and commitment, which were seen as key to the program’s success.
• Industry collaboration in the wine sector has successfully leveraged funding from multiple sources through partnerships with regional bodies, national organisations, and industry associations, allowing for joint promotion of WA wines in international markets and efficient pooling of resources to amplify export efforts.
• Not all wine producers are aware of the industry collaboration.
• There is some confusion over the difference between WA Wines to the World and Wines of WA.
• The WA Wines to the World program has contributed to the growth of WA wine exports, especially for small and medium producers, by providing critical support, resources, and market access that would otherwise be unavailable, while fostering industry cohesion and professionalising the messaging for WA wines.
Domestic market initiatives
• Currently the strongest domestic sales channels for wine producers are Distributor – WA; Cellar door and wine club; and other DTC. They anticipate significant growth across these channels in the next four years with Cellar door and wine club the strongest, followed by Other DTC and Distributor – WA.
Intrastate
• The priority domestic markets that producers want to target include New South Wales/ACT, Victoria, and Queensland as their top priorities.
Assistance with development of ‘Bookable experiences
Communication of relevant industry events and activities
Support for regional wine shows and/or awards
Assist producers to find and work with distributors
• The majority of respondents believe the collection and provision of domestic sales data is important and they also indicated they would be willing to provide sales data.
Distributor - WA
National retail chains –direct chain relationships
Distributor - Interstate
Direct wholesale –salesperson/agent
Other DTC –events, online, ecom,
Cellar door & wine club
• The most important activities and services in developing the domestic marketing strategy include ‘funding for on-ground projects and regional activities’ and ‘support for interstate domestic marketing and promotion’. Others include provision of reliable market and consumer data and analysis’, ‘collaboration with Australia’s South West, and Tourism WA’ and ‘forging links with other organisations to further regional accommodation, food and tourism activities’.
Rating Domestic sales channels current and in 2030
Distributor - Interstate National
Direct wholesale –salesperson/agent
Other DTC –events, online, ecom,
door & wine club
Prioritise the Australian domestic markets
Relative ranking by Respondents Relative
Stakeholders
Addressing gaps with the new IGP program
• Export marketing activities should prioritise high-impact inbound trade and media visits that immerse key buyers in WA’s wine regions, supported by targeted masterclasses, roadshows, and coordinated on-trade promotions to build demand and lasting trade relationships. Additionally, programs should include market entry support, distributor/buyer matching, and digital campaigns (including social media and e-commerce) to improve visibility, access, and sales in key international markets.
• The top four prospective countries to target for export in the next period include Southeast Asia (Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam), United Kingdom, China, and Japan.
• The new IGP should reduce its focus on large international trade fairs, as they are viewed as costly, crowded and often fail to deliver meaningful commercial outcomes.
• Wine producers are keen to see the focus shift to include the domestic market as they believe the east coast market has been neglected. In targeting the domestic market producers would like to see an emphasis on educating
the wine trade, promoting local WA wines and encouraging consumers to ‘buy local’ wine.
• Domestic market efforts should focus on increasing visibility and loyalty for WA wines through consumer-facing campaigns, events and tastings particularly in key interstate markets like Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. Simultaneously, strengthening wine trade relationships via regular trade tastings, education for hospitality professionals, and support for WA retailers and restaurants will help build long-term market presence and brand recognition across Australia.
-premise - chain (wine/specialty)
-premise - independent
- independent
- chain
• The new IGP program should focus on building stronger domestic and interstate trade and consumer engagement through targeted events, direct-to-consumer campaigns and deeper collaboration with tourism partners to promote WA wine locally and nationally.
(direct-to-consumer)
• Producers are excited about the ‘Exhilarating WA’ tasting event planned for Sydney in June 2025.
• Collaboration with the tourism sector is viewed as essential for building wine tourism and recognition of local WA wines.
Respondents Relative ranking by Respondents
Rating 2025 Rating 2030
Areas to consider for the new Industry Growth Partnership program
Based on the discussions with wine producer stakeholders, respondents outlined the following areas that could be considered in recasting the EGP into the new Industry Growth Partnership, which now encompasses the domestic market and has a sustainability focus, to increase producer engagement and to further increase the profitability of the WA wine industry.
Overall program
• Maintain strong communication and coordination.
• Provide more support and opportunities for smaller producers in targeting the export and domestic market.
• Be more inclusive of other wine regions, outside of Margaret River and the Great Southern.
• Improve post-event feedback on event outcomes, including performance insights and market reaction.
• Implement systematic follow-up and reporting on trade visits and activities.
• Assess the return on investment (ROI) for each activation to inform future planning.
• Share outcomes of activations with producers to improve transparency and relevance.
• Assist producers to follow up communication with those involved in the activations.
• Invest in targeted engagement with reviewers and sommeliers both domestically and internationally.
• Subsidise producer participation in paid tasting events.
• Develop training and education programs for Australian wine professionals and sommeliers to cultivate WA wine ambassadors.
• Establish clear benchmarks for success for export, domestic, and sustainability efforts.
• Continue to bring international and domestic trade/media to WA to allow them to experience wines first-hand.
• Ensure that due diligence is done on any inbound trade/ media invitees to identify the key players who have the buying power to ensure that wine producers are connecting with the right people.
• Support multi-regional and collaborative inbound events, not just those in Margaret River or Great Southern. Support other wine regions to be involved in inbound activities with a potential event in Perth to capitalise on international or domestic trade/ media visiting the state.
• Replace overly busy trade itineraries with curated, story-driven experiences that showcase WA’s natural assets and quality products in iconic settings.
• Develop premium wine tour formats for a deeper and more memorable experience.
• Investigate opportunities to promote the premium wine sector and research other examples around the world.
Domestic Market
• Ensure the domestic market program has multiple elements to it and framework similar to the export program i.e. regional events and regional promotion funding.
• Prioritise marketing and promotional efforts in key interstate markets in NSW, Victoria and Queensland targeting trade, retail, media, and consumers.
• Develop trade and consumer events to boost awareness and sales.
• Facilitate inbound trips for east coast and Perth trade/ media to visit the regions and showcase WA wines.
• Roll out ‘Exhilarating WA Wines’ events in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Adelaide.
• Investigate an opportunity for a DTC focus on the back of the Exhilarating Wines of WA event.
• Increase intrastate activations promoting buylocal and sustainability messaging.
Potential activities and services to develop the domestic marketing strategy
Collaboration with ASW, & TWA
Funding for on-ground projects andregional activities
Interstate domestic marketing and promotion
Reliable market and consumer data and analysis
Further regional accommodation, food, & tourism
Intrastate domestic marketing and promotion
Assistance with development of ‘Bookable experiences
Communication of relevant industry events and activities
Support for regional wine shows and/or awards
Assist producers to find and work with distributors
• Investigate Perth based activations based around each region to showcase WA wines to local trade and restaurants.
• Support multi-regional and collaborative inbound events, not just those in Margaret River or Great Southern.
• Engage with consumers through DTC events (i.e. wine fairs), retail promotions and targeted marketing campaigns.
• Create marketing campaigns that inspire loyalty and preference for WA wine.
• Create an education campaign around sustainability and efficiency in the wine supply chain, offering consumers meaningful reasons to support local (e.g. reducing transport emissions).
• Incorporate sustainability messaging as a key consumer-facing message in the domestic marketing strategy.
• Strengthen public relations efforts to elevate the profile of WA wines through media outreach, ensuring that the unique qualities of the region and its wines are regularly featured in relevant publications and media channels.
• Investigate innovative ways to engage local buyers, and look to other countries for inspiration.
• Develop WA wine education events for sommeliers and wine industry professionals (people working in venues and selling wine) to increase awareness and knowledge of WA wines.
• Explore the freight and logistics challenges and work with Wines of WA to negotiate shared or contracted freight arrangements to reduce high transport costs to the east coast.
Export Market
• Continue supporting effective export programs (e.g. UK retail, Asia on/off trade).
• Focus on high-growth markets such as Southeast Asia and China, using targeted outreach to hotels, retail chains, and café groups.
• Include initiatives that allow producer-to-buyer matching in targeted markets.
• Investigate new market opportunities.
• Continue to host inbound trade/ media visits for export markets.
• Ensure that due diligence is done on any inbound trade/ media to identify the key players who have the buying power to ensure that wine producers are connecting with the right people.
• Follow up inbound visits, with a visit to the persons’ respective country to further build relationships and sales opportunities.
• Investigate opportunities to involve other wine regions in inbound activities with a potential event in Perth.
• Continue supporting trade and consumerfocused masterclasses to increase awareness and market penetration
• Investigate targeted distributor incentives and buyer matching programs to increase WA wine sales in specific international markets.
• Include initiatives that allow producer-to-buyer matching in targeted markets.
• Identify key international wine critics who influence export markets and facilitate visits to WA.
• Invest in ongoing social media campaigns and collaborate with wine influencers to promote WA wines in key export markets.
• Explore e-commerce opportunities in Asia, using Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs) and social media platforms like WhatsApp to drive sales through digital wine-tasting events and online sales portals.
• Continue to offer the ‘new exporter workshops and coaching’ activity to encourage new exporters.
• Reduce investment in large, low-return trade fairs.
Sustainability
• Develop a unified marketing strategy for the wine industry that emphasises sustainability in production and packaging.
• Communicate the collective effort to reduce the industry’s carbon footprint, with an emphasis on the industry’s journey toward greater efficiency.
• Provide additional resources and funding support for wineries aiming for Sustainable Wine Australia certification.
Tourism
• Strengthen collaboration with Tourism WA and local tourism partners.
• Engage more with tourism bodies/ organisations that can enhance the messaging, add value and where industry can leverage funds.
• Collaborate with Tourism WA to market the wine regions and promote that the Swan Valley is easily accessible from Perth.
• Collaborate with regional tourism, accommodation, and food providers to integrate wine tourism into the broader regional experience and enhance WA’s destination appeal.
• Liaise closely with Tourism WA to develop bookable wine experiences and promote regional tourism alongside wine. Liaise with the tourism sector to determine how to best engage with incoming cruise ships for regional wine activations.
• Partner with Tourism WA for premium wine tourism experiences.
Marketing/ Branding
• Develop and implement a targeted media campaign (social media, billboards, etc.) that focuses on supporting local, sustainable wine and food production.
• Extend the existing ‘Exhilarating Wines of WA’ visual assets into consumer-facing campaigns such as billboards and digital ads, linking wine to tourism and highlighting WA’s wine credibility.
• Strengthen storytelling around WA regions and provenance.
• Create campaigns that inspire loyalty and preference for WA wine like ‘Buy West, Eat Best’ or use viral/visual or playful marketing strategies (e.g. ‘support local over NZ wines’).
• Promote sustainability and carbon-conscious wine practices in messaging.
• Investigate targeted campaigns using standout varietals e.g. chardonnay.
• Develop and distribute marketing materials (e.g. imagery, videos) that tell the story of WA wines, which can be shared by all producers.
Resources and capability building
• Ensure smaller producers and those outside major regions are included in programs. Be more inclusive of other wine regions (outside of Margaret River and the Great Southern) and increase resources for wine associations to enable them to participate in activities.
• Support smaller producers who lack resources.
• Allocate additional administrative support to regions, helping them manage domestic, export, and sustainability-focused activities and to maximise the program effectiveness.
• Provide support to smaller or under-resourced regional wine associations through capacitybuilding, strategic coordination, and resource sharing.
• Build capability within regional wine associations to lead local implementation.
• Develop internal expertise and relationships within Wines of WA to reduce reliance on external consultants and retain program knowledge.
• Provide transparency around the future of Hydra’s involvement and ensure continuity if personnel changes occur. Ensure that intellectual property and networks built by individuals (e.g. consultants or key personnel) are properly managed and integrated within the regional ecosystem, establishing a clear structure for ongoing knowledge retention.
• Evaluate IP management in the EGP and restructure the IGP to safeguard intellectual property, strengthen industry relationships, and ensure long-term ownership remains within the sector.
• Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of different organisations (e.g. Tradestart, Wines of WA, WA Wines to the World and Wine Australia) to avoid overlap and inefficiencies.
• Define and refine Wines of WA’s role within the broader wine industry ecosystem.
Collaboration
• Support collaborative marketing efforts across producers and regions.
• Explore logistical support for shared orders and consolidated exports.
• Support the creation of mixed-region producer groups (e.g., new-to-market wineries) to co-host inbound and WA trade events, sharing costs and offering diverse wine portfolios under the WA brand.
• Strengthen partnerships with Austrade and Tradestart to leverage their networks and co-host activities that offer access to strategic markets.
• Promote ongoing collaboration between WA regional wine associations to amplify collective impact at the national and international level.
• Investigate a support mechanism or logistics solution for consolidating export orders (e.g. mixed pallets or containers), making it easier for buyers and inbound trade missions to access a range of wines.
• Investigate a WA wine club initiative coordinated by regional associations or WoWA, offering subscribers a rotating selection of wines from various wineries, boosting visibility and DTC sales.
• Investigate further opportunities to collaborate and leverage partnerships.
WA Wine Industry EGP Review Questionnaire
1. What region do you represent?
WA Wine Industry EGP 2025
2. How many years have you been exporting, and if not are you looking to?
a. What % of your production before 2021 did you export?
b. What % of current production do you export in 2024?
c. What % of production do you aspire to export?
3. On export sales from WA; as at Dec 2024 the volume is up 20% and value 15%. As a participant in the EGP program, do you believe the EGP engagement is achieving the stated aims? How would you rate on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is the program achieving its aims?
a. From your company perspective?
b. From a WA Industry perspective?
4. What EGP programs have you participated in this FY (2024/25)?
Rate on scale 1 – 10 _________
Rate on scale 1 - 10 _________
a. What activities do you believe the new IGP should do more of or focus on?
b. What activities do you believe the new IGP should do less of?
5. Has your participation with EGP supported your efforts to increase sales/profitability in the targeted market?
a. Can you please provide examples where activations have proven successful and/or not so?
b. How did you find the EGP program to work with? (communication, delivery, or follow-up)
c. Rate the communications (electronic) from WA Wines to the World Rate on scale 1 - 10 ______
d. Rate the communications (electronic) from Wines of WA Rate on scale 1 - 10 ______
6. Please indicate your top 4 prospective countries to target for export in the next period.
7. Can you outline where the EGP has or may have linked wine producer efforts up with other market development activities and leveraged funds with other parts of industry?
8. In your opinion what would WA Wine exports look like if the WA Wines to the World did not exist?
9. Can you please identify the importance of the following International Sales Channels to allow this program to support your marketing efforts. How would you rate - out of 10, where 10 is high?
a. the strength of the identified sales channels to your business, and
b. what would you like the balance to be in 4 years’ time?
a. DTC (direct-to-consumer)
b. eCommerce
c. Off-premise - independent
d. Off-premise - chain (wine/specialty)
e. Off-premise - chain (supermarket or convenience)
f. On-premise - independent
g. On-premise - chain
Blackwood Geographe Sth Forest Swan V Peel Gt South Margaret R
In the new IGP there is the intention of maintaining a focus on Export, however there will be an equal focus on a Domestic marketing program.
10. Can you please identify the importance of the following Domestic Sales Channels to allow this program to support your domestic efforts How would you rate - out of 10, where 10 is high?
a. the strength of the identified sales channels to your business, and
b. what would you like the balance to be in 4 years’ time?
Domestic Sales channel Rating now Rating in 4 years
a. Cellar door & wine club
b. Other DTC
c. Direct wholesale
d. Distributor - WA
e. Distributor - Interstate
f. National retail chains
g. Other - please specify
10. Wine Australia provides the industry with current export sales data including by region, variety, and country. The information also tracks volume and pricing. There is currently very limited data around our domestic market.
a. Please indicate if you consider collection and provision of domestic sales data to be an important factor?
b. Would you be prepared to provide sales data across a range of sales channels to an independent provider which would be amortised and shared at the granular level maintaining anonymity for the individual winery?
11. In developing the domestic marketing strategy, please identify your priority markets
Local region Perth/ other WA South Aust Victoria NSW/ACT Tas Queensland NT Yes No
12. To assist in developing the domestic marketing strategy, please rate the importance of these potential activities and services
a. Provision of reliable market and consumer data and analysis.
b. Funding for on-ground projects and regional activities.
c. Workshops/programs to assist producers to find & work with distributors
d. Support for Intrastate domestic marketing and promotion.
e. Support for Interstate domestic marketing and promotion.
f. Communication of relevant industry events and activities led by other organisations.
g. Forge links with other organisations to further regional accommodation, food, and tourism activities.
h. Collaboration with Australia’s South West, & Tourism Western Australia
i. Assistance with development of ‘Bookable experiences.’
j. Support for regional wine shows and/or awards
k. Other suggestions:
13. Which marketing activities interest you most in Export markets? Please cite 3 or 4 of your preferred activities:
For example: Inbound trade and media visits; Tradeshows; Regional roadshows; Trade Masterclass, Education, and tastings; Consumer Masterclass, Education, and tastings; Coordinated regional retail and on-trade promotions; Individual distributor incentives; Market entry programs; Development of regional marketing and sales assets; Social media campaigns or Distributor/Buyer matching
WA Wine
Export Growth Partnership Program Review - Stakeholder Responses
NOTE: Each interview is numbered (1) to enable readers to identify and follow an individual conversation.
Question 1
What region do you represent?
For this report 20 respondents were interviewed to provide feedback on the WA Wine industry Export Growth Partnership (EGP) program and their views on the new Industry Growth Partnership (IPG) which will focus on both the export and domestic market.
The respondents included 15 producers who represent the various wine growing regions in WA. The majority had wine operations in the Margaret River region followed closely by the Great Southern. Other regions included Blackwood, Geographe, Southern Forest and Swan Valley.
Question 2
How long Exporting?
How many years have you been exporting, and if not are you looking to?
a. What % of your production before 2021 did you export?
b. What % of current production do you export in 2024?
c. What % of production do you aspire to export?
Regions represented in the producer interviews (n = 15) Estimated percentage of production
A further 5 stakeholders whose organisations are closely aligned with the EGP were also interviewed.
Of the 15 wine producers interviewed, 10 have been exporting for 10 or more years with six producers exporting for 5 years or less. Prior to 2021, the percentage of their individual production exported ranged from 0% up to 80% with an average of 16%. Exports have dropped marginally to an average of 14% in 2024 and vary between 1 – 35%. Producers aspire to increase
- independent
exports to an average of 28% of their production, again with a range from 10 – 50% of their total wine production. Only one producer is looking to reduce their exports.
Comments
• The export market has a lower return than the domestic market, that is reality. (3)
• Our export sales have come off a bit mainly with the impact of China, as a lot is exported ad hoc into China. We were going to stop it but they stopped it for us. We haven’t developed new markets, but we will keep dipping our toes in the water. (7)
• Our total production has increased as well, so this is in line with a bigger increase in exports. Australia is a strong exporting country. We are a small population and if we keep producing wine we need to convince more people to drink wine; we need to export more and import less, so it would be nice to keep developing the export market. (9)
• Some markets haven’t recovered after Covid i.e. Japan. Dubai is back for now, for one year we did not get one single order, the US is just a basket case for WA wines, the UK and US have been in decline for some time, China we have lost out a lot as well. The most potential to come back is the UK. The only shining light in the last year is Indonesia but they have all sorts of weather issues and tourism is down. (10)
• At the moment a lot of the markets around the
have collapsed. (12)
Assistance with development of ‘Bookable experiences
Communication of relevant industry events and activities
Support for regional wine shows and/or awards
Assist producers to find and work with distributors
Question 3
EGP engagement is achieving the stated aims
with ASW, & TWA
Funding for on-ground projects andregional activities
Interstate domestic marketing and promotion
On export sales from WA; as at Dec 2024 the volume is up 20% and value 15%. As a participant in the EGP program, do you believe the EGP engagement is achieving the stated aims? How would you rate on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is the program achieving its aims?
Reliable market and consumer data and analysis
Further regional accommodation, food, & tourism
a. From your company perspective? Only producers
Intrastate domestic marketing and promotion
Assistance with development of ‘Bookable experiences
Communication of relevant industry events and activities
b. From a WA Industry perspective? Both producers and stakeholders
Support for regional wine shows and/or awards
Assist producers to find and work with distributors
From an individual company’s perspective, more than half of the respondents believe the EGP program is achieving some of its stated goals. A smaller proportion rated the program less than 5 out of 10 and not really achieving its goals. The overall average was just over 5.7.
From a company perspective, responses were mixed regarding the success of the program. Many producers who rated it between 6 and 10 believe it has helped achieve its aims, contributing to business growth and facilitating market access. Some acknowledged growth despite economic challenges, while others found inbound and outbound trade initiatives beneficial for engaging with new markets. However, producers who rated it lower (1–5) expressed concerns about gaps in support, limited participation opportunities for regions outside Margaret River and the Great Southern, and challenges in aligning the program with their specific business needs. Several respondents noted that while the program has raised awareness, export growth remains difficult due to economic conditions and pricing structures.
Distributor - WA
National retail chains –direct chain relationships
rating out of 10
Distributor - Interstate
Direct wholesale –salesperson/agent
Other DTC –events, online, ecom,
door & wine club
Inbound trade visits
Trade fairs and roadshows
Perspective of EGP engagement impact on Industry
Regionally and portfolio led projects
US sommelier competition
Wine Blast visit and podcast
Wine Connection retail promotion
Producer led projects
New exporter workshops & coaching
The program was viewed as more successful from an overall industry perspective, at 6.7. A larger proportion of respondents recognised the EGP’s role in supporting Western Australia’s wine sector, with some emphasising that it has helped unify the industry and improve visibility in international markets. Others acknowledged that while there are positive results, growth has been uneven across different regions, with some benefiting more than others. Those who rated the program lower (1–5) questioned its overall impact, stating that exports have not increased significantly or that growth is largely due to external factors like tariff changes rather than the program itself. Some argued that the global wine market is becoming increasingly competitive, making expansion difficult regardless of EGP’s efforts. There was criticism about the mandatory funding model, suggesting that direct financial support to individual industry bodies might yield better results than the current structure.
From a regional perspective, the EGP achieved an average of 7.2 as rated by stakeholders who acknowledged that the program has strengthened certain wine producing regions, fostering a more unified approach to market representation. Some believe the partnership has delivered good outcomes, although ambitious targets have yet to be fully met. Others questioned whether success is due to the program itself or broader industry efforts, noting that export trends are influenced by production levels, winery-led initiatives, and external market forces. While some stakeholders credit the program with measurable results and increased sales, others remain uncertain about the extent of its direct impact.
Comments
Company perspective
• Yes - Rating 6-10
• Yes, it is achieving its aims, and the numbers support that. (1)
• Yes, I do believe it is achieving its stated aims very clearly. (3)
• From a Margaret River perspective they have done a reasonable amount. (4)
• For our company, it is hard because we haven’t directly seen any results from what we have done, although we haven’t done a lot. (7)
• Yes, it has but the ROI is another thing; you put in a lot of effort to sell 4-5 pallets of wine each year. We have had growth in troubling times, it will be tough to maintain that growth / impact. We are potentially going into a worldwide recession with tough and troubling times. The difficulty is trying to do it at a certain value above $15/bottle and that is tough; we are selling at $160/case so that will be a $50-60/bottle in Singapore, 5500 yen in Japan, and the US depending on the state id between $30-45/bottle. In Australia that same bottle is about $30-50/bottle. They are not super expensive wines but it does put it into the premium category. (9)
• I think the comparison, compared to say Victoria where we also are involved, is that what is happening in WA through the program is a terrific initiative and provides great support. (11)
• From our company’s perspective the activities have helped; the inbound and export initiatives in terms of engaging with new and established markets. There have been some great opportunities for us to get our product in front of new markets and buyers. (14)
• If you look at the Great Southern and the export numbers, our company contributes quite a bit to the growth in exports but also have our foot in the door in other markets already so our growth is spurred on by that more so, but the program has contributed to some of that. There is some growth clouded amongst that. (15)
• Rating 1-5
• It has been helpful. It is new territory for us and a huge learning curve, we get some support but there are huge gaps. (2)
• A lot of the events are focused on the Great Southern and Margaret River, and other regions are left out. (4)
• I am not sure it is hitting the mark at the moment with the outcomes we need. There are good things in place but there is still a way to go. (5)
• No from our company’s perspective. We have engaged in trade activations and various grant programs and promotions overseas, but our export volume has gone down. That is more of an economic problem rather than branding. What people do in times of lower disposable income is they trade down, people are still buying wine, but they don’t trade in that space therefore we don’t get traction. (6)
• Not much value to us as it is difficult for us to participate as most programs we are excluded from because we are not in the Margaret River or Great Southern region which is often a requirement and that you should already be in the market. There might be a new market we want to access say with Japan but we needed to have product in the market already to be able to participate, which we don’t. (8)
• It is not attributed to EGP. For us it didn’t work because the programs didn’t suit our company. For our company the major criticism is the framing of promotions have been difficult to participate in as they are quite specific; there was one to do Aspen Colorado and we couldn’t participate unless we were already exporting there. (10)
• I am involved in ad hoc programs – do we know the program has driven volume; from my perspective it is low as in WA I am unsure what has driven it. (11)
• For us as a company, it hasn’t really helped achieve a huge amount of growth with export, but it is still a positive specifically for us it has helped with great awareness. We have had some activation funding for on premise which most useful in the US. (13)
• Stakeholders’ regional perspective
• Yes, from where we came from before, there is no doubt within the Great Southern it has helped as it was each to their own before and everyone wanted to do their own thing. They all thought they were the best i.e. Frankland River, Mt Barker etc. and there was no Great Southern feel about it. Now there is a more collegiate feel about the Great Southern rather than everyone doing their own thing and it is a better brand if you go to market together rather than disjointed. It has all led to a greater emphasis on the Great Southern. (16)
• The aims are very ambitious, and it is a tough climate, but they are achieving significant outcomes. I don’t think it has actually hit the ambitious numbers set out. (17)
• It is very difficult to tell - is it due to the partnership or luck? My organisation has invested heavily in outbound and inbound missions; it is hard to know the specifics. The Great Southern results have been positive and if that is due to the partnership it is hard to know as there could be other factors. You would assume it has contributed. (18)
• I guess so, I am not sure of the full program, only in our involvement. Is it completely due to the program - probably not; the program supports the outcome but is not necessarily the driver of the outcome. (18)
• On the fence - it is not a criticism as there are other factors involved; it is a broad sweeping statement. You can’t put all the credit against EGP, there are other factors which include; production, the amount of work other wineries are doing to promote the region, other people promoting exports like stakeholders who aren’t using EGP etc. Over the last few years, the figures have gone downhill – does the EGP take the blame for that? You need to take into consideration how many bottles producers get from harvest and what is for sale. At one stage they didn’t want to export as
they could get the highest profit margin in the domestic market and the freight and overseas travel was impacted during Covid times and the ability to export. (19)
• It is really successful, we managed to get producers behind a lot of the activities and the investment has been worthwhile for them. We have seen an increase in sales from a number of activities and have heard anecdotally numerous different export deals that producers have done that reflect that. Our region has really got behind the program and the figures reflect that. (20)
Industry perspective
• Yes - Rating 6-10
• It is patchy, there are areas that are doing well and some areas that are not showing the same level of growth. (1)
• For industry it is better, as there are different sized producers who have different sized assets and resources. (2)
• A lot of medium to larger wineries have jumped on board, and some smaller wineries lack capability or time which is a big factor that gets overlooked. They are already doing lots of jobs and can’t get to it or don’t want to have a punt. No matter what resources you throw at it they can’t do it. It has bought a lot of new people into exporting, and a lot have had some good wins. (3)
• I am not sure there is enough due diligence on the people who come out to Australia for some of the activities as there are not a lot of serious buyers. While it could be done better, you need to be in it to win it. (4)
• It is certainly better and being more successful from a WA industry perspective and has resulted in increases in sales in export markets. (6)
• For industry we are seeing more activity has been created and opportunities are present, and the program is quite successful in achieving what it wanted to achieve. (7)
• Yes from the feedback we are hearing and what we are seeing in terms of the activity in the export market. (8)
• I would say it has been successful from an industry perspective and there needs to be decent sized players who have seen growth. In terms of some of the programs that have occurred and inbound trade, we are doing things that we weren’t doing and in more organised way than years earlier and our competitors are doing the same or an even better job. That is reality; the amount we spend on these programs is less than the rest of Australia and European wine regions. (9)
• I am a bit biased as in WA the region is booming because of the program; the awareness of Margaret River internationally is surprising given the region only started in the 1970s. In WA, the regional bodies have taken this initiative to a new level, and it is more streamlined in WA because of the program. (11)
• For industry I rated it a little better as I have heard others saying they are getting good results out it. (13)
• For industry, it is in some areas, it is definitely helping from the Great Southern perspective. I know some producers are having success and some are treading water but it is a slow process. (15)
• The program has worked better from an industry perspective, but it is not perfect. Other regions particularly within the southwest, they do a lot of programs together. They have done it individually in the past, but now with working together when you go overseas you achieve a lot more and the WA brand is more recognised. They have a sense that WA does exist, but they are not really sure where it is. They don’t recognise the Great Southern really or Margaret River. It is about doing more together. (16)
• It is hard because industry is fragmented in that there are regions that aren’t export capable and what we are doing in the Great Southern and Margaret River is very different to say the Blackwood Valley, so it is hard to gauge. (17)
• Overall it is less than from a regional perspective as the figures show that other regions have not benefited to the same degree. (20)
• Rating 1 -5
• I am not sure it is hitting the mark at the moment with the outcomes we need. There are good things in place but there is still a way to go. (5)
• I don’t know how others are going. The stated aims are to increase exports and the dollar value per litre and the number of exporters. I don’t have visibility on the number of exporters, the dollar value per bottle we haven’t achieved that, and exports haven’t increased at all. I can’t comment on the growth as I don’t think it has grown but is in decline. The only increase in markets is China and Hong Kong, and that is more attributed to the lifting of tariffs and not so much the EGP. (10)
• In WA it is the unknown, I am unsure what has driven it. I believe exports have gone the other way, I don’t know if it is anything to do with the program. The whole global wine business is so much more competitive than it has been and that is the reason it is difficult. (12)
• It is lower from the industry perspective. Primarily my criticism and feeling is that if I had the money that was put into the mandatory funding in industry and spent that directly I would get a better result. Everyone who gets involved their number one aim is to help themselves and then number two is the industry. I don’t have time to help the industry, whereas if I did get more involved and engaged with bodies and meetings maybe I would get more out of it. With the mandatory funding, if that was distributed to the various bodies based on tonnages then potentially, they could do the work internally themselves or hire an external consultant to assist in the process to create export opportunities. With the money going in, we don’t see the true benefit. The smaller guys probably see more benefit than us. Since Liz has been involved it has been a 1000% improvement, I am not critical of her but imagine if this money went straight to those associations to administer that process. (14)
Funding for on-ground projects andregional activities
Interstate domestic marketing and promotion
Reliable market and consumer data and analysis
Question 4
What EGP programs have you participated in this FY (2024/25)?
The most frequently participated in activities in the Export Growth Partnership program this financial year were inbound trade visits, attended by 80% of both producers and stakeholders. Trade fairs and roadshows had engagement from 67% of producers and the majority of stakeholders. Regionally and portfolio-led projects attracted 40% of producers, the US sommelier competition was ranked equal fourth along with the Wine Blast visit in terms of producer participation. New exporter workshops and coaching had the lowest participation among producers, with only two (13%) engaging which focused on new exporters, hence the lower participation rate. Stakeholders were involved in all activities to some degree as a funder of the activity, participant, or in their role in supporting wine producer efforts.
Comments
• The big one that is not there is the Asia On Off trade that’s where we saw the biggest change, it was massive as every winery selling into Asia was using that one. There was also the UK retail distributor program and UK promotional support program they were two powerful vehicles which led to an increase in stats for WA. (3)
• We were also involved in a retail promotion in Hong Kong; Watsons Wine Week in Hong Kong and Wine Australia tastings in Seoul Korea and Singapore. (6)
• We did the new exporter and coaching workshops; that was excellent and delivered well, we got a lot of value out of it as a small business and particularly with the one-on-one coaching. We got to ask direct questions of someone and that taught us the practical skills like how to research markets, how to research where pricing should be. If you are totally new to the market, it is great value. (8)
• We did our own program in Bali and hit up the EGP for funding. We instigated it. We got $943 funding out of $6000 expenditure, so it didn’t really cover much only a certain percentage for retail value for samples. It costs a significant amount of money to give away samples. The program wasn’t framed to cater for the local market conditions. (10)
Distributor - WA
National retail chains –direct
Distributor - Interstate
Direct wholesale –salesperson/agent
EGP programs Respondents participated in FY 2024/25
• We have been involved in on premise activation marketing in venues and pouring discounts; our distributor was able to access funds and use that to offer things to venues to put wines on the pours which has helped created awareness. That was the Asia on off trade promotions support program and we have done that twice now and Vin Expo. We were also involved in the MTM Wine project in Japan with Austrade where our wines were sent to Japan for tasting and that has led to us getting a potential distributor. (13)
• Stakeholders
• We participated and part funded a lot of programs; we were the first to do inbound trade missions and we also part funded, and it was our idea to do the wine connection retail promotion. We did instigate a lot of the programs. (16)
• We part funded these EGP programs in conjunction with Wines of WA. (19)
• I have been involved in all of the activities, as I also support producers to get into them. (20)
a. What activities do you believe the new IGP (Industry Growth Partnership) should do more of or focus on?
Respondents believe the Industry Growth Partnership program should have a strong emphasis on inbound trade visits as they are seen as highly beneficial when well-executed; they allow buyers to experience WA’s wine regions firsthand. However, several respondents raised concerns about the lack of proper vetting of visitors and suggested that better filtering is needed to ensure only serious buyers attend. There was also a push to make inbound activities more inclusive of regions outside of Margaret River and the Great Southern.
While respondents are happy to hear the new program will also focus on the domestic market, they believe it should place a stronger focus on promoting Western Australian wines in the wider domestic market, particularly targeting eastern states markets in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. Many respondents highlighted the importance of holding regular trade and consumer events in these cities to boost awareness and sales. There was a call for more creative and engaging trade initiatives, beyond traditional formats like masterclasses, to better capture the attention of buyers.
Producers are excited about the upcoming ‘Exhilarating Wines of WA’ event in Syndey and would like to see that rolled out into other capital cities, and also host a potential consumer facing event following it.
There is a desire to see more activity within Western Australia itself, especially in Perth, to promote regional wines through activations that are more accessible and cost-effective for producers. Education is seen as a critical tool, particularly for wine professionals from overseas working in Australia, who may not be familiar with WA wines. Building their knowledge could have long-term benefits if they return to their home countries with WA wines on their radar.
Many respondents stressed the importance of direct-to-consumer (DTC) marketing and expressed frustration with the limited consumer engagement in current programs. They believe more should be done to reach end customers directly, whether through wine fairs, retail promotions, or targeted marketing campaigns. There is strong support for creating emotional connections between consumers and WA wines and encouraging a culture of buying local wine with a lower carbon footprint.
In terms of trade engagement, respondents recommended focusing on the people who actually buy and sell wine such as retailers and distributors, as well as influencers, sommeliers and high-profile wine reviewers.
Respondents highlighted the opportunity to better integrate wine promotion with tourism, suggesting partnerships with Tourism WA and other tourism organisations. They see potential in showcasing wine regions through tourism campaigns and events, including efforts to engage cruise ship visitors.
Equity and inclusivity were raised repeatedly, with smaller producers and those outside the key regions calling for more support. Many feel the current program favours larger producers or those in well-known areas, and they would like to see more opportunities for participation.
Another strong theme was the need for better evaluation and follow-up on program activities. Respondents want to understand the outcomes of trade visits and events, including whether they led to sales or new partnerships. They believe the program should measure return on investment more rigorously and share results with industry participants.
Several respondents mentioned the value of involving key wine reviewers, both domestically and internationally, and emphasised the importance of training and education programs for Australian sommeliers. They believe this could lift the profile and reputation of WA wines on a global scale.
Within the current EGP activities, producers want to see continued and expanded support for targeted, high-impact export activities such as the UK retail program, Asia On/Off Trade, the US sommelier competition, and Wine Connectionstyle retail promotions. They value initiatives that offer direct engagement with buyers, practical market feedback, and support for both established and new exporters, with a preference for focused, strategic efforts over broad roadshows or light promotional content.
Export market support remains important, particularly in key regions such as the UK, Southeast Asia and parts of North America. Respondents expressed concern about spreading resources too thinly and suggested a more strategic approach focused on high-value markets.
Marketing and branding efforts should continue to build a strong narrative around WA’s wine regions, with more storytelling, sustainability messaging, and consumer-focused campaigns. Some also recommended using humour or patriotism in marketing and emphasising standout varietals like Margaret River Chardonnay.
Collaboration is key to growing the WA wine industry, as it allows producers to pool resources, share costs, and amplify their collective presence both domestically and internationally. There are calls for more joint initiatives between producers, such as shared trade shows or regional wine clubs and to utilise the skills, knowledge, expertise and networks of the various stakeholders. By working together across regions, with partners like Austrade/Tradestart and regional bodies, the WA brand can be further strengthened to create more impactful marketing and sales opportunities.
Respondents believe that working together can increase impact, reduce costs, and offer more diverse offerings to buyers.
Finally, many respondents highlighted the need for increased resources, especially administrative support at the regional level. They feel that without adequate staffing, it is difficult to fully capitalise on opportunities, particularly as the program’s scope expands to include domestic marketing and sustainability alongside export.
Comments
• Domestic market
• I am keen to see more focus on domestic marketing of WA wines, WA has neglected markets in the eastern states for a while and that engagement is important because there is still a lot to sell in the domestic trade that will benefit us more. I am keen to see the sustainability focus as well because it is becoming a market entry barrier. (1)
• Like what has been done in the export market, it is important to keep the awareness going in the domestic market. Margaret River certainly does punch above its weight on the eastern seaboard in Australia. (11)
• Domestic market - trade events (inbound) –they send representatives who can’t make decisions. It would be nice to see a fresh idea and solution to engage buyers in the domestic market not just staff from bars. We need to rethink away from the Riesling Masterclass; it needs innovative thinking and to look at other markets around the world as to how they engage local buyers. The trade is getting flooded with requests. A Masterclass won’t fix that. If we had a request from a bar who wants to see how we process things, you could do an inbound for domestic that would be super cool to get people from the east coast or Perth into regions and on the ground seeing stuff. As a producer I would be happy to co-contribute to these things as it does cost a lot to cover that. If say you had 10 buyers from key Perth bars visit a region, I would only be too happy to be available and contribute. (13)
• We really haven’t done a lot on the east coast. We are starting in Sydney in June with a trade event. It would be good to do that in Melbourne and Brisbane as well. And have some consumer facing events like wine dinners and retail promotions - both DTC and trade. (20)
• Intrastate
• Work with the trade in WA and local WA restaurants to buy local wine. (10)
• Marketing and education; I think we will see more and more continued growth in imports particularly from Mediterranean Europe and Continental Europe and there will be more coming in. We haven’t done enough to educate wine professionals in this country. We have missed this boat. WA has got a great resource in people working in this country and they work in venues and selling wine. Most of these are from places like Italy, Argentina, Spain etc. They are working in wine stores and selling wine and they know about imported wines. We need to educate these people about our wine before they go home, where they might get together a wine list and we want them to include WA wines. The ROI is long but if you run say 4-5 education classes and get them to understand WA wines, that would be invaluable. Industry would only be too happy to do it based on region, varietal, or producer discussions. You have got a captive audience. (14)
• We always look international and interstate but sometimes neglect intra state; Perth based activations around each region could have some value as well. It could be expensive for producers and funders of the project but say have something at the Treasury building which features regions in a targeted way as it will be a cheaper activity compared to an outbound trip to India. Producers will be able to participate in that event. It could focus on both DTC and trade, and get wines into restaurants. Most wineries have a distribution network but we could do something like ‘buy west, eat best’; wine doesn’t play into that but here is an opportunity. (18)
• Interstate
• We are taking part in the Exhilarating WA tasting in Sydney in June and the last one was 20 years ago; I think that is great and there will be about 45 wineries involved. Events like that should be held more regularly and rotate around the country say to Brisbane, Melbourne, Adelaide etc. (6)
• We are going to be involved in a trade tasting event in Sydney in June where there will be 50 participants and 300 wines (6 wines each) all from WA as part of a new program Exhilarating Wines of WA. It is great to see a focus on the domestic market going forward as almost everyone believes we have neglected it. I am a fan of export, but it is difficult for smaller producers to participate in. Now we can promote WA wines across all markets; it was quite narrow before. (10)
• Domestic market growth requires bringing media across to WA. Get Australian journalists and also bloggers and influencers over here. (11)
• Target trade on the east coast in Melbourne and Sydney – an event for on premise and independent retailers. (11)
• The export program had multiple elements and some grants for producer groups and regions. I think it is really important that the domestic program has a similar framework where regions can secure funding to do regional events and regional promotion. For us we are keen to bring trade groups from interstate into the region (inbound trade). And we are also looking to take promotions into on-premise to the east coast so funding for regional promotion would be good so we can create our own event to showcase the region. (17)
• DTC domestic market
• It is great to do some domestic as we need to put money into the domestic program, these days it is harder in export. Twenty years ago we were selling containers of export wines from WA and these days you are lucky if you are selling pallets, unless you are giving wine away. We can sell a significant amount of wine on the east coast, but we need to build focus on building brand WA. And we need to do that in the eyes of the gatekeepers, it is not consumers. We do a lot of DTC and there is no problem selling on the east coast but if you go through distributors/agents or to a trade show – they are holding back. Consumers are buying lots of wine, and we are seeing lots now in Margaret River with direct flights from Sydney and Melbourne. The program at the moment they are hitting the gatekeepers which hopefully will work because the consumer doesn’t need a lot of convincing. (4)
• DTC focus in the domestic market – we are doing an event in Sydney in June Exhilarating Wines of WA which is focused on engaging with trade but there is no direct-to-consumer component. The reality of every single market is that they can’t take on another 40 wine brands – there lots of good wines, the reality is 1-2 producers will pick up a distributor. For other wineries they may meet some clients or restaurants may pick them up. I believe DTC is the most important for domestic wine brands full stop. The only thing that rivals that is if you get on premise presence i.e. a restaurant. We need trade fairs for consumers or wine events. Or on the back of the Sydney event that could say run a 3 hour consumer facing session. It wouldn’t cost much. And if you go to the event and get 5-6 cellar club sign ups or sell a few thousand dollars of wine it has paid for your trip. The most important is direct sales. The event could also move around to other capital cities. (9)
• Consumer focus and marketing - focus more on things that connect people who want to drink the wine, focus on the end customer for our product and how we get them wanting to buy WA wine, and then my wine. We want people to look at WA wines before other countries. Within the domestic
market we want WA people to become parochial and buy local product. What do we need to do and how do we do it? We don’t do enough. The trade sits in between us and the consumer, we need to get to people who buy the wine. Remove the middleman. I would like to see it become the norm that people look for local wine and local restaurants serve local wine as well. How do we do that from a wine marketing point of view – we need to talk to the people buying. Something like the ‘buy west, eat best’ campaign. We need a marketing campaign and education of people say working in the bottle shops. We want them to champion WA wine. Maybe there could be an incentive. It is not an easy ask but a long haul. (8)
• Any future program should include an element of consumer (pull). The Sydney show is a great trade initiative and I am both optimistic and positive it will be worthwhile for us. What we get is no opportunity to get exposed to anything with consumer pull. We need to get consumers engaged in wines from WA. What was done 15-20 years ago were events where tickets were sold to consumers and they got to sample and engage in wines from WA like a Wine Fair –similar to what is done for the trade but for consumers. Something like that is needed over east - we don’t need to do as much here in WA. We need a strong element of consumer involvement. (12)
• Targeting trade
• What I would like to see is more specific events that deal with people buying and selling our wines, not so much people who write about it. There are plenty of consumer events around the world. We haven’t been doing enough for the distributor – trade. The Exhilarating Wines of WA event is not about wine writers but about people on the floor who are selling wine in retail or premises. It is cheaper than participating in say the Good Food and Wine show and there will be direct benefit in talking to people across the table. There are plans to take it other capital cities. We need more trade focused promotion interstate and in larger markets including the US, UK and Canada. (10)
• Inbound
• Inbound trade visits which have involved fine wine buyers, there needs to be a better assessment on the buyers that come and be more realistic as to who is involved as they come along and then tell us they want cheaper wine so there is a disconnect between buyers and producers. (2)
• The inbound clients coming are not screened properly, and some are a waste of space. When you spend money to bring them here and they turn around and say they are not interested in WA it is disappointingthat should be the first question asked. We copped a bad one from the UK; we found out he has form and has done that to other countries as well. We did our own roadshow into China, and that was the best one we have done as opposed to group fairs. Wines of WA are doing better than other regional associations as they are offering flexibility in comparison to Victoria or South Australia. I would be more inclined to say get funds through the program from Wines of WA and do our own standalone roadshows as we have found it better because you find it is a political landscape in terms of who makes decisions with the wineries involved. (5)
• More inbound trade visits from Asia and the US, preferably in the regions. More inbound trade and create more opportunities and get more people internationally to come out to our regions particularly. A lot of EGP is about producers going overseas but I believe we need to bring buyers to the region as it is more accessible and more affordable. We can showcase the regionality and provides the opportunity to have an engaged, focused and motivated audience. It allows them to have more of a feel which often you need with wine in the regions. It is more powerful than trade shows or roadshows where you are one of thousands showing wine and it is hard to stand out and engage buyers. I feel the EGP is more skewed towards fairs and roadshows rather than inbound. I know you can’t wave a magic wand and get big buyers coming in from overseas countries. (6)
• Ability to focus more on inbound buyers but more so outside of the Margaret River and Great Southern regions and a collaborative approach i.e. other wine regions and smaller wine producers as we are excluded from a
lot of the program activities as it says ‘only Margaret River GI or Great Southern GI’. Maybe it shouldn’t be so regionally biased, but I also understand there is reason for it because it is matched funding say from the Development Commission in the region. There is a catch there. I believe the program should talk to other associations as we want to all participate in exporting, but we have less resources to export. More collaborative with multi region inbound, more around varietals or people’s target markets but make sure you match the right people with the right thing and where they want to go. (8)
• In bound trade is great and giving those people experiences. (9)
• Bringing inbound buyers from other countries – those programs are way more successful than sitting in a room in the US talking to someone. You need to identify the key players, get them on a plane to our region. That is a good use of funds and time. (10)
• In bound trade visits are important particularly getting trade and sommeliers out to the region. (11)
• Inbounds – we have picked up business from one of them but they work well as long as you are bringing the right trade over here to experience our wines, that is the number one strategy. (12)
• Inbounds – as they draw people to the region and bring buyers down. I am talking trade specifically as there is value in that. (13)
• Inbounds I would like to see the people that jump on a plane inbound - where they sit within their organisations and how much power have, what their business is worth and how much they can buy? A lot are here for a junket, that is bloody obvious. There needs to be more research / due diligence done on these people. And if the invitation is extended to them, at the last minute the invite is not transferrable, it is not a case of filling up seats on the plane. If that happens, we will be treated more seriously and not have to deal with say a junior apprentice who can’t make the decisions. Over the last 20 years, I say only 2-3 opportunities have presented themselves from real people, there are a lot of hamburger helpers – this is an invite for this person. (14)
• More inbounds – it starts a lot of relationships and conversations and hopefully is based on producer opportunity; they then reciprocate a visit to that country where relationships are being formed and build on that. Effectively these guys do lots of visits each day, they are exhausted, and they drink lots too. I get there is good intentions and we need to put booze on lips, but that amount does not do it justice. If you go to the Food and Wine Show and you get to the end you can’t really remember which one you liked. That is unfortunately a byproduct of what we have created. It is about relationships at the end of the day and then follow up in their own country, otherwise it is half baked. (15)
• Research premium wine tours – facilitate bus trips for trade to the regions. Have brochures available on the bus so they can immerse themselves in the region. Otherwise it doesn’t tell the full story. Target both the export and domestic market and distributors say on the east coast. Don’t visit too many wineries but capitalise on the setting of that region and let them settle in that moment while they appreciate the wine. We need to investigate examples of premium tours and see if it would work here; it would take inbound trips to a whole new level. You can highlight the region and differentiate it from other wine regions. (15)
• Filter inbound trade; we need to filter the trade better as to who we invite, some are clearly on a junket and are very wealthy individuals and the fact that the WA government is paying for half of their trip, they say we will put our hand up. We need to get fair dinkum buyers. (15)
• I think we should do national inbound trade missions; have buyers from the east from selected markets to WA i.e. Endeavour group, ALN and some other larger or smaller players who are interested in wine like we do with international trade emissions but have national trade missions. Bring them here to expose them to the WA wine industry. Take them through the Great Southern and South West to do lots of sampling. It is really important. (16)
• Tourism
• More tourism engagement with wine tourism and with other partners that can add value i.e. Development Commissions or government. It is about more collaborative integrated programs. There is certainly opportunity to pair with food and engage with other parts of the WA food industry and tourism. (1)
• Dovetail in more with tourism WA. Not every image is of Margaret River or the Kimberley, the beauty of the Swan Valley is right on our doorstep and if people don’t have time to drive the 3 hours to Margaret River they can visit the Swan Valley. Adelaide promotes it well that they have three wine regions within an hour’s drive. (10)
• I think there needs to be significant government investment in wine tourism in WA – millions of dollars spent. There needs to be change of emphasis or focus from TWA and state government to the premium wine sector and look at bookable wine experiences and promoting regions around wine. Currently there are zero funds, and to make a difference we need lots of money. (16)
• Collaboration around which markets to concentrate on; the whole wine tourism space is untapped yet so there is a big opportunity to work with Tourism WA to get a wine tourism program together. (16)
• How you can intersect wine with tourism; we want people to travel here and visit cellar doors. It also has other benefits for individual regions featured in a marketing piece like our wine, why not come to visit the region and go to wineries. It is about driving sales through different mechanisms and marketing the region through the wine produced. Promotion and media there is a relatively small amount of funding there but how do you use a partnership to leverage off bigger agencies or entities around the tourism space that can enhance the messaging. It is about collaboration and leveraging. (18)
• Cruises – you have Albany, Busselton and Esperance that are cruise towns. How do you potentially activate the wine industry around cruise visitation – it has it issues as you can’t take wine back on the boat. But say if you have got 3000 people in Albany that can’t get out to wineries – how do you activate industry around engaging with that. There might be an opportunity with participating in markets in town. (18)
• More support
• It would be great if there was more interest in wineries on an individual basis and not so much a blanket solution. Who needs help with what? More support as wineries in WA are still small compared to the east coast, it comes back to the size of producers. There should be more support i.e. Ferngrove have a huge marketing budget whereas smaller producers have less resources, and less staff, and a smaller budget so they need more assistance. (2)
• Opportunities for smaller producers and those outside of Margaret River and the Great Southern to participate in the program. The reality is that there are other producers out there. Now it is very limiting. (8)
• Look for opportunities for smaller producers as we get the feeling that we are left out and that it is far easier to get attention if you are from Margaret River or the Great Southern. Activities for smaller producers or other regions are few and far between. (9)
• Feedback / evaluation
• Follow up on visits and trade shows; with the UK there was zero follow up. The program should do that -– who did you talk to? Do you need support? I would love to know who got picked up but there is radio silence so there needs to be more follow up and a debrief individually. (2)
• Inbound trade visits get people to visit our markets, but then there is a distinct lack of follow up communication with those people that came. How do we keep the conversation going with direct communication from wine producers. There is no communication from the program or the person. It would be good to get feedback on activities; recently they brought journalists over but we didn’t see the outcome of that as they don’t share the articles/stories or promotions with us. It is left up to us to find the articles. We also don’t know if any activities resulted in sales for anyone. I know it is hard to capture but they don’t need to say who, they could report that this many wineries connected with a new distributor in a particular overseas market. (6)
• I would love to see the breakdown of each event and participants; outcomes are always ambiguous. There is no serious way to measure how effective the program was. But Hydra could say for example that the Asia program was successful because of the number x of participants etc. and the outcomes. Whereas for participants the program was deficient as it didn’t cover expenses. (10)
• I don’t know really as I don’t know what has worked and what hasn’t. From my perspective not a lot has worked. The program should be doing ROI on activities. I am not sure if that is happening buy say if they get 12 people out here to WA – do they buy anything or is it a complete waste of time? As an individual I haven’t found too many benefits from it. The information could be shared but it is most important that the people who make the decisions know the ROI. There is no problem with zero it just means don’t do it again. For example the Asian (included Japan) buyers visit early 2024. At calendar end 2024, each visitor should have an assessment run (ROI) e.g. what have they purchased calendar 2024? Value $? Number of wines? Number of wine brands? Cost the industry contributed to the visit? Total up all participants = an ROI. That way, the industry can tell what has worked as opposed to the majority who did not pick up any business being not completely overwhelmingly positive. Simple to say on export sales from WA; as at Dec 2024 the volume is up 20% and value 15% does not categorially say that the programs have worked. I would like to know which programs have led to business so I can look to include my brands as participants. (12)
• ROI of programs? It would be interesting if all the people involved in the EGP, who have say representation in the UK or whatever market, if you were to ring them up and ask them where they see the value? There are several initiatives from our end that we feed into our importers who say don’t spend the money on that. They may be feel good activities but not of any commercial value. The ROI should be assessed of the past programs to determine if there is benefit. Get tough; if you spend $15,000 what good does it generate? At the end of the day everyone wants to sell something to keep the wheels going. (14)
• Wine Reviewers / Sommeliers
• Support for wine media promotion –Halliday, The Real Review, a promotional WA feature – a combination of both to feature WA highlights and amazing things of WA wines. We are already talking to these guys. The Real Review is paid tastings; maybe subsidies to do some key tastings. They are paid tastings of up to 150 people where producers showcase their best wines to high end trade and there is a cost that comes with that, so small subsidies to participate in that activity. (3)
• It is a hard one as there is a lot of good stuff, you can only focus on so much – one really good thing was the Ryan Montgomery activity (Editor for James Suckling) and getting him into the region was brilliant and that should be an annual thing. When you get your lines reviewed the score translates into sales and that is money right there. (3)
• It is about getting the correct international people into our country or the correct people to rate our wines as that is one of the key requirements to targeting the export market. There are a couple of key players who control it all. Major international reviewers who are rating wines are recognised outside Australia i.e. Halliday ratings in Australia are not relevant outside of Australia, even if your wines are rated the best. Asia does not recognise it, they are looking for Suckling reviews or Wine Advocate. We need to identify who the right people are and get wines in front of them that will benefit the businesses trying to export. It is an expensive exercise. I know it has been done in Margaret River. We have been trying to get a group of smaller producers in front of this guy but can’t get anywhere. Perhaps the program could do that and try to show the diversity of wines from WA that can be exported. Margaret River is always the lead but why not take away GI’s and have a pool of businesses who are exporting and get them all in front of reviewers. (8)
• Develop an education and tasting program for Australian sommeliers; one of our big problems is that Australian wine professionals are not on par with the sommeliers in the US or UK who are very European educated in the wine scene. The most aspirational qualifications within the wine industry are all run out of the US and UK. European wines are viewed as premium wines, and I do benchmark against those wines because we can learn from them. We have to compete and crack that market in every export market we target. We have no real tasting or education program for sommeliers here in Australia. It is about trying to develop one. If you look at competing countries, they are educating people – I know more about wine regions in Italy. We need that education piece along with how we get people to aspire to drink our wines and learn this stuff. Once our wine becomes aspirational then we can command higher price points, and it is recognised worldwide. We need education within Australia and a competition for Australian sommeliers. How can we get more excitement around WA? Long term growth is through education and programs and we are starting to head that way. (9)
• Target sommeliers from the east coast and get them over to WA and educate them about our wines and get them into WA regions. (20)
• EGP programs
• I believe the UK retail program support is essential to the growth of the UK market and needs to stay and be continued every year. With funding dwindling down, they shouldn’t pull too much funding away from that with the new domestic focus. And the Asia on off trade program which has flexibility; Asia is where growth is and through that program it provides the opportunity to target the South East Asian market including China. (3)
• The US Sommelier competition was great and low cost, that drew a bit of attention and had follow through so more of that. It was focused on WA wine and the winner was able to fly out to Margaret River and taste wine. (6)
• Vin Expo in Singapore – would like to see that continue on a bi-annual basis with financial assistance and the coordination of the activity. (6)
• The regional and portfolio projects are good and tend to be more focused on what we are trying to achieve. They are a better spend of our time and allow the focus on a region or portfolio of producers – varietal or WA focus. Roadshows are a blanket approach. (6)
• Wine Connection retail promotion – we participated in and the way it worked is that they found a retailer interested in say a Margaret River cabernet – you then submit a wine and then the retailer chose the one they wanted. It is about matching buyers and sellers. That concept is good to focus on. It is more targeted, specific and generally more beneficial. (6)
• The US sommelier wine competition was good and you might be able to do it in other markets. It is great because you get lots of wine professionals to study up Australia so potentially you have got 50 people in a destination market being more confident to talk about Australian wine. For the ROI that is cheap. The US competition was a great example of engaging sommeliers and getting them to study up our wines. It was high level for them to learn about Australia. (9)
• Podcast Wine Blast – that was a good activity where we got good exposure, it is hard to gauge if we sold more wine. Overall the program keeps WA and Margaret River in the minds of people around the world. (11)
• The new exporter program is worthwhile even though it’s not applicable to us. The new exporter workshops are an important initiative to get new exporters into the program because the more critical weight from WA the more focus you get so it is important to keep it in the program. (11)
• Continue the on premise stuff like the Asia On Off trade program, I am happy with Asia as we are trying to grow that market and that was quite successful for us. We are already in that market, but it helped drive what we have already got and we got more money to spend to market our wines. (13)
• The Japan activation was good with trying to find a distributor where we sent wines to a group of people to taste it and to get feedback from the market; that would be good to do in other regions to see how people receive the wines. It is a good way to do it as it is fairly low cost and low involvement, and you can get a bigger bang for your time spent and value. (13)
• The Wine Connection opportunity was hugely successful for us in terms of finding a distribution point on a volume level, we are still working on it in terms of premium distribution in that market. The support in terms of that promotion and campaign with the ongoing digital marketing support and the introduction to Wine Connection was really positive. I would like to see that replicated in other markets as well. (14)
• The Wine Blast podcast was nice but it shouldn’t be done annually. It is a bit light and fluffy as you do the podcast and it is going to mates and then no one buys anything. (14)
• On the recent Thailand trip it was great to look around but the true value comes from buyers in those countries that we can hear from directly; this is what floats our boat. We were taken to liquor stores – but no disrespect it was a waste of time as they don’t know what is behind their displays and lay out in store, we can only make assumptions. If you meet with buyers at their flagship store and they walk us around then they can explain what makes them feature certain wines, why they layout wines this way – you can ask questions. Meet the buyers or bust otherwise it wastes peoples’ time, even if you are visiting a group of restaurants, meet the group buyer and have a conversation with them so they can explain the process of buying, featuring wines by the glass etc. (15)
• The retail promotion with Wine Connection that model really worked so more of that. It was a Singapore retail promotion with a chain of stores. I would like to see that happen in other markets i.e. China and elsewhere in SE Asia. (20)
• The Wine Blast podcast was good but a one off so I’m not sure we could repeat that but it provided an opportunity to increase awareness of the region and it was quite humorous. (20)
• The buyer missions they need to maintain and keep it consistent with two a year and do more in the ecommerce space in selected markets to China in particular and then focus on intra and interstate events which highlight the brand. You might do that within the Good Food and Wine Shows. (16)
• Trade missions need to focus on retailers that want to buy direct i.e. Marks and Spencer, Waitrose those who want to go direct rather than through importers. (16)
• The international wine spirits competition (IWSC) worked well, and inbound visits, I would like to see more of those. (17)
• Export Markets
• Try not to be all things to all people; there are markets we should focus on and others we shouldn’t i.e. we make good money out of the UK and get good FOBS. Also parts of SE Asia, South Korea, Singapore, and Thailand are quite significant in terms of FOB and Japan. And to lesser extent Canda whereas the US the jury is still out. Brand Australia is stuffed in the US because of Wine Australia. (4)
• I do like the idea of new markets and to look at the choices and focus areas i.e. Thailand and Vietnam are emerging markets, but they are small. I would like to know how to crack India and European and UK markets to get back in there because at the moment the Australian category is dead. Wines of WA are better off to go on their own and do an event over there to showcase what we do in WA as WA is not even mentioned over there. You are going up against big companies and they are chasing the lowest price point, no one talks about regionality, and we have great stories in our sub regions. Bring back the personality and the sizzle. The only hope we have got is if Wines of WA were afforded the money to be able to do it. (5)
• More new to market opportunities breaking into new markets as they are effective from an export perspective. Domestically it is tricky because we have good national support for our own domestic sales. (14)
• It is naturally going to evolve over time particularly with the political climate, some markets might need some focus particularly the US. The program has good momentum and insights on where we’re heading now, we just need to keep the momentum going. (17)
• Asia should be a focus, UK continues to be the focus and US is questionable. Trade focus should be inbound but also there is a role to bring international influencers which includes media and include regional visits. There is no value entertaining in Perth. (17)
• I would like to see a lot more in China –outbound visits and inbound from Chinese delegations trade and media and include a Masterclass. (20)
• Branding
• There is probably not a lot around branding and provenance. If you look at 10 regions, and the provenance story and coordination of that provenance story you can have a regional led piece rather than individual led piece around marketing promotion activation in the region. It could be done in the export or interstate through targeted outbound activities i.e. east coast. From a branding perspective, you can’t place value on wine if you don’t know the region or where it is from or the quality coming out it. (18)
• Marketing
• Roll out the Exhilarating program which is backed with amazing visuals of the various wine regions and roll it out into consumer led promotion in markets i.e. direct advertising and billboard campaigns which deal with the regions and tie it in with tourism. That is the next step. Have a campaign run with billboards in major capital cities to remind people. We lost our new crown to Tasmania in Pinot Noir but we are not the new kids on the block we are well established in WA. Tell the consumer. (10)
• DTC marketing – we could do a way better job in pushing WA wines to market in general and make sure we are the first choice particularly in our own market. Get them to support WA wine, it is a great campaign for us say with something like New Zealand as many buy the sauvignon blanc and it is their drink of choice; if you don’t like them beating us at cricket or rugby, then why buy their wine? Viral marketing is what works. We used to command that territory, so we need a campaign to win the consumer over again. (10)
• Education/ media/ PR - opportunity to get more consumers to eat drink and support local and especially something that is harnessed with the sustainability message. Eat drink local and cut out major CO2 emissions of the wine industry and agriculture generally which is transport. Have an education message around the quality of wines and other reasons to support local based around sustainability. If you spend money on an Instagram campaign or billboard – what do we need to do? Within sustainability we talk about being certified and aspiring to be more efficient at the winery; the reality is an efficiency gain in the vineyard is affecting say 20% of the pie and 30% of the pie is transport and 50% of the pie which is glass and bottling services. One of the biggest bangs, if you are doing all this - what message can we give to consumers rather than being all green – how can the consumer be involved in this change? It is about advertising and changing behaviours. (9)
• Find one topic to grab people’s attention –what is the best thing we have got on offer – Margaret River Cabernet or Margaret River Chardonnay – pick one and the path of least resistance. The easy story is Chardonnay as recently it is a stand out, Bordeaux have Cabernet so that will get more difficult and we are flogging a dead horse. We need to get chardonnay through – I would like to see a targeted approach that is easy to communicate and sell the message. Focus on one. (14)
• Showcase the regions - buyers come to our region or WA and it isn’t working. If it’s agreed that our natural environment is a major feature and / or part of what we are selling –then I believe that there would be a greater benefit from a Great Southern point of view to host tastings / food / hospitality on site in our natural assets – i.e. Stirling Ranges - Bluff Knoll / Castle Rock / The Gap or even the Whaling station in Albany etc. This then gives some neutrality to the setting and no winery is given an advantage and it’s a fairer playing field. Each time I have attended these trade missions the buyers are exhausted, blurry and overwhelmed. I’ve had buyers write to me and say they can’t drink for weeks after due to the alcohol intake in one trip. I understand that lots of people want their share or demand an event but at the moment, this is at the sacrifice to many other producers.
I would encourage as per my theme, a less is more approach – but done well to provide a 360 view of WA – so they become our story tellers – they can pass on the moment they tried x-wine or x-WA product amongst an iconic setting that they have forever. My potential concern is that they may be walking away with a hangover and a “good time” rather than the full WA message of phenomenal produce that we’ve all created despite all the challenges that we face as an isolated city / state / country. Now it’s kind of a Contiki tour of WA – I would prefer it’s more focussed. (15)
• Marketing strategy around sustainability; we need to touch on it. If we all work harder, it will be better for the industry. The big players are interested in that and where it has come from, how it is made and what the carbon footprint looks like. (20)
• Collaboration
• Producer led roadshows that encourage groups to work together; get together a bunch of new to market producers and it can provide an opportunity to collaborate (not all from one GI) and offer diversity in the wine portfolio so they are working as a collective and not competing. We are not always competing as we grow alternative varieties. In bound or outbound – we can share costs, make more noise because there would be more of us and it would give more clout and yet you are still promoting WA. We have wines from WA being exported with different stories and there are different tastes from across regions. From our view, we don’t need more exporter workshops and coaching, we need a way to understand or guidance on how to collaborate – it might be about bringing the right group together and determine what works for them. It might give smaller wineries an opportunity to work together. (8)
• Work more collaboratively together rather than by themselves. When we go overseas work with Austrade more collaboratively because they have networks into these countries. (16)
• Continue to work together with the regional bodies. It is too small on a national sense to not work together. (16)
• Consolidation opportunity – if a buyer doesn’t want one container of one wine, we have done work in that space and can access wine from 15 wineries. How do you do that effectively. Each customer is specific. What can you support around consolidation – there is an opportunity for orders across regions, or for producers across regions which can potentially uplift those statistics. With sales it will be easier for inbound missions as they can get a pallet from a few wineries. We have our own trade sales contract and do work in the trade space. (18)
• Wine club – look at how you can have coordinated activity around regional based online wine clubs and how you can elevate it so you can have regional based ones – i.e. 2 from each winery each month. It could be led by the Wine Producers Association rather than the individual winery. (18)
• Resources
• We need help from people who are experts in this that can connect the dots for producers; we need to tweak and refine what we are doing now, we need ongoing support. We can’t abandon it, we need more support and ongoing help like regional support. The region needs more resource to support producers. (15)
• Capability and sustainability of knowledge and networks, this is a Hydra issue more so, a lot of these are activity focused. If a person develops IP and networks where does that sit? (18)
• Add support for regional wine associations – Wines of WA is the hub and they are the spokes. Other than Margaret River, investment into building skills and capability of that person or supplementing the resource. You need an essential person within WoWA who can work across all regions. I am not sure what others get i.e. resources but they all grapple with similar issues and rely on producer funded levies. You have some associations with more staff as opposed to those with 1 person or volunteers; how do you do that better and more effectively, and what are the efficiencies that WoWA could support? How do you utilise WoWA as that service provider? (18)
• One weakness of the program is that the regions don’t have enough administrative resources to maximise the effectiveness of the program. Additional resources are needed at a regional level because they are juggling lots of balls and more so if there is going to be a focus on domestic, export and sustainability as well. There is a lot of organising with the activities and there needs to be more of an administration allowance. We struggle as we take on more admin and lack the resources at a regional level. (20)
• General comments
• It is a monster change of structure, it has gone from 100% export program and got manipulated late to support domestic activations and additional money when China reopened. It is now 40% export, 40% domestic and 20% sustainability. It is hard to say because it will have to do different things because the structure is different. They need to try to develop good benchmarks as to what success looks like and have a way to report against those benchmarks importantly in the initial phase. There needs to be lots of planning now to set up for success. It is too early without understanding the pillars are export, domestic and sustainability. The actual planning has to be done well in the next few months. (1)
• We walk away from Wine Australia now as no one is interested, and they charge so much and bring little to the table. I am not sure who they believe is the client, but they disregard the wineries. The regional bodies are more active and at least we get listened to whereas with Wine Australia, WA is the last thing on their mind. (5)
• Sustainability - we have a goal as the association to get 50% of our members certified with Sustainable Wine Australia. It is important for producers in the region to look at it. It would be good if they could get some additional support. We are looking to apply for a grant from the Federal government. (20)
• The core focus is more matching of sellers to buyers and more specific opportunities where possible. At the end of the day, it will present more tangible results i.e. because of that activity we sold x cases case at this price. A lot of activities are marketing
based rather than sales at the moment and getting people to look at WA wines and marketing that. Now we need to ensure we get some sales-based tangible results out of it, rather than say we travelled the world and showcased our wine to x amount of people. It is about creating sales opportunities. (7)
• Capability building in the region and providing more resources to the regions would be helpful; money for people. It is also important that the regional brand is heroed, it is not the Western Australian brand because it is not on the bottle. We are trying to grow the regional brands and putting things out from WA doesn’t help grow or build the brand awareness. (17)
• We have a great working relationship with Liz and she is always mindful of us when it comes to opportunities. We have had great access to money can’t buy experiences or opportunities that are worthwhile rather than throw lots of money at advertising, wine shows etc. We want spaces where we can become engaged at a more meaningful level and present our brand, our wines, our story, and our winemaker. We focus on lots of channels to market. (14)
• I recognise people are trying to do their best and trying to achieve great outcomes for everybody. I just feel like we’re trying to do too much and are caught up in being everything to everyone. And it’s not creating the outcomes that it’s tasked with or being as effective as it could be. (15)
• I do see there is an opportunity to work more with tourism. (19)
• Unfortunately, there are several projects we agreed to participate in, ones that we wouldn’t otherwise do, as activities require 50% funding and they were desperate for us to be involved. I believe there is not enough planning and foresight into these to make them successful. Some of the inbound activations have been good. Looking at outbound activities there should be more B to B rather than B to C as it is less successful with direct-to-consumer promotion. There is room for improvement, and they don’t have the skills to do it as it is a complex market and not the core business of Wines of WA. (19)
b. What activities do you believe the new IGP should do less of?
Many respondents felt that large trade fairs and international wine expos are not delivering sufficient return on investment. They described these events as overcrowded, expensive and ineffective, and producers struggle to stand out among hundreds of wineries from around the world. Some suggested that funds would be better spent on targeted, state-specific, or regional promotions rather than being part of a generic activity.
There was also criticism of inbound trade visits, with several respondents expressing frustration about poor vetting of participants. They felt many attendees appeared to be on a “junket” and lacked real buying power or intent. To make these visits worthwhile, there needs to be stronger due diligence, better filtering of attendees, and clearer alignment between visitor profiles and producer goals.
Some pointed out that inbound trade missions need to be more focused and better structured, recommending a “less is more” approach. Rather than hosting many rushed meetings, they suggested doing fewer, high-quality experiences that are memorable and better aligned with WA’s strengths, such as immersive tastings in iconic natural settings.
Some participants suggested the IGP should avoid investing in markets that do not align with WA’s premium positioning, such as high-volume, lowprice regions that are better suited to large-scale producers. Respondents urged the program to focus instead on high-value, niche markets that appreciate WA’s unique offering.
There was criticism of bureaucratic processes, such as the complexity of budgeting or booking travel through the program. Smaller producers and volunteer-led regional groups in particular found these processes overly burdensome and lacking in support.
Respondents also noted that there should be less focus on the Margaret River and Great Southern regions, calling for more inclusive support for smaller producers and lesser-known areas.
Participants also noted that activities should only proceed if they meet a minimum participation threshold, suggesting that poorly attended events be cancelled to avoid wasting funds.
There were calls for more clarity and transparency around the terms of participation in retail promotions and partnerships. Producers want to clearly understand what’s expected and what outcomes to expect before committing.
A couple of respondents felt that large producers should receive less support, as they have the resources to operate independently. Instead, the focus should be on helping small and mediumsized businesses access new markets and opportunities.
Finally, several respondents called for the program to prioritise outcomes and sales rather than simply showcasing wines for exposure. They want tangible results—such as cases sold and partnerships formed—to be the core measure of success.
Comments
• Trade fairs
• The trade fairs are a waste of time, roadshows are better but the selection criteria is more important and you also need the right people on the ground when you go to areas. The connection piece is getting the right importers and distributors in those markets i.e. Thailand and Vietnam. At the moment if you are short on time, what market gives you the best bang for your dollar, smaller markets are not worth it currently. (5)
• Tradeshows as you are one of thousands showing wine and it is hard to stand out and engage buyers. I feel the EGP is more skewed towards fairs and roadshows rather than inbound. I know you can’t wave a magic wand and get big buyers coming in from overseas countries. (6)
• Less trade fairs and roadshows as they happen regardless, and people can go off their own back. Spending EGP money on that I am not sure is a good spend as opposed to other activities. It is an easy one to put a table together, but I don’t feel it is beneficial. Wine Australia does those. (7)
• I don’t believe personally the big trade fairs are of value. We did one before and we didn’t get a lot of value as we are a small player. Even though it was a shared thing, they are very large and there are lots of wineries there from across the world. There were big companies who also participated who were revisiting the market. The fairs are trade based and I believe there should be less of that. (8)
• I didn’t get much value from the Singapore Wine Show Vinexpo, so less events like that. I question larger trade fairs as they are expensive and crowded. People attending have to decide which countries to visit as there are lots of countries and it is a bit of a swim through even for dedicated wine professionals. Perhaps go up as an Australian event or WA event might work. (9)
• Trade fairs I am not so sure you get bang for your buck as they are quite expensive and you have got every other winery from Australia competing. Maybe it is better to do a WA event rather than a whole of Australia event. The program has a lot of new initiatives, and it seems to be working; they keep coming up with new ideas which are driven by feedback from industry. It doesn’t work as well for us with trade fairs. You need to be careful say if something gets dropped if it is only one winery that finds that. (11)
• Less of trade fairs like Vin Expo as I find them watered down as you are amongst a big group of people, and those who come the majority are not buyers and they are just staff who are there to taste wines. The most value I got out of that was tasting everyone else’s wine, it is not a good spend as far as I am concerned. (13)
• Less trade fairs as they are not as effective, particularly masterclasses within the trade fairs, you don’t know who will show and half the people are not engaged, and they are expensive. (17)
• Trade fairs as the feedback is that you are one of a thousand people and it is very difficult to get traction. There needs to be a regional presence or WA presence and it needs to be coordinated through maybe a Wine Australia section and then a sub section under that. I haven’t been to any but I have heard that the Barossa and Clare Valley are very organised. (18)
• Inbound trade visits
• I question inbound trade visits as they sound nice in bringing trade over, but I question the value of people coming over, a lot treat it as a junket. In my experience we have had very little value from those, none generate orders. It has only given people a nice awareness piece, they don’t do much. (3)
• Due diligence and follow up for these trips bringing buyers down; if they did due diligence on people who come as they are not high quality and follow up as to did they buy, why didn’t they buy. We have supported the events and live in hope that they will bring decent people down and it will result in sales. (4)
• I would like to see research done on the people that jump on a plane inbound; where they sit within their organisations and how much power have, what their business is worth and how much they can buy? A lot are here for a junket, that is bloody obvious. There needs to be more research / due diligence done on these people. And if the invitation is extended to them, at the last minute the invite is not transferrable, it is not a case of filling up seats on the plane. If that happens, we will be treated more seriously and not have to deal with say a junior apprentice who can’t make the decisions. Over the last 20 years, I’d say only 2-3 opportunities have presented themselves from real people, there are a lot of hamburger helpers – this is an invite for this person. (14)
• We need to filter the trade better as to who we invite, some are clearly on a junket and are very wealthy individuals and the fact that the WA government is paying for half of their trip, they say we will put our hand up. We need to get fair dinkum buyers. (15)
• Other comments
• Less investment in markets that don’t make sense for WA wines i.e. high volume lower quality markets as we don’t have enough volume. We need to focus on premium markets. Also less bureaucracy if possible so there is more money that gets into the hands of industry. (1)
• The exporter workshops as I am not sure how well attended they are? But for me I have been exporting for a long time so they have zero value. If there are only say three people, they are wasting their time but I am unsure of the attendance or if they are necessary. If they spend money on them, they need to make sure they are giving value otherwise you are wasting money. (3)
• Don’t target the US market as Brand Australia is stuffed in the US because of Wine Australia. (4)
• Less focus on Margaret River and Great Southern and be more inclusive of producers in other regions and smaller producers. (8)
• The core focus is more matching of sellers to buyers and more specific opportunities where possible. At the end of the day, it will present more tangible results. As a result of that activity we sold x cases at x price. A lot of activities are marketing based rather than sales at the moment and getting people to look at WA wines and marketing that. Now we need to ensure we get some sales-based tangible results out of it, rather than say we travelled the world and showcased our wine to x amount of people. It is about creating sales opportunities. (7)
• Generally it has been ok, but the way we have had to apply for things is clunky with the interface and the way we have to put a budget together is not straightforward. We are involved in a combined project with Blackwood and Geographe regions. We have had to work hard to get some money for it but for not much money. What is hard is that we are volunteers whereas other organisations have paid staff i.e. Margaret River. (8)
• Less programs in markets where clearly they have difficulty in establishing sales. Big companies like Treasury Wine Estates are in market and can drive their own markets.
Don’t try and emulate large companies with programs that are designed to make us larger. Be more sniper-like on events. Instead of an event in 5 cities in the US just go to New York, or maybe choose some Midwest region that buys lots of wines. Be more selective and target where you spend money.
• My view is the participation rate needs to have a floor – if you put on an activity and only 3 commit to it you need to pull the pin, don’t do the event. The Aspen event only 3 people did it, there was limited participation in the event and it didn’t make a lot of sense. And others couldn’t participate because they weren’t already exporting there. Some producers are capable of looking after themselves, not that they should be excluded but it is about making sure these events are run for the right reason not just for the sake of running events. If you are not super confident it will be successful, don’t spend the money. (10)
• For us as a company, the major criticism is the framing of promotions have been difficult to participate in as they are quite specific - there was one to do Aspen Colorado and we couldn’t participate unless we were already exporting there. (10)
• We did our own program in Bali and hit up the EGP for funding. We instigated it. We got $943 funding out of $6000 expenditure so it didn’t really cover much only a certain percentage for retail value for samples. It costs a significant amount of money to give away samples. The program wasn’t framed to cater for the local market conditions. (10)
• Contract terms for activities – e.g. Wine Connection as far as the opportunity presented, it is important that the contract is clear. When you look at the opportunities there should be a quick ready reckoner that if you submit wine these are the terms; 12 months and then review sales over the 12 month period to determine if you become a list supplier. It is important they are clearly expressed, as they aren’t currently. I know it is up to us to ask questions but when producers look to get involved in initiatives, they look at it as a one year deal, tender deal or signing up an arrangement and what they need to do to meet milestones. There should be more transparency. (14)
• My criticism and feeling is that if I had the money that was put into the mandatory funding in industry and spent that directly I would get a better result. Everyone who gets involved their number one aim is to help themselves, and then number two is the industry. I don’t have time to help the industry – whereas if I did get more involved and engaged with bodies and meetings maybe I would get more out of it. With the mandatory funding, if that was distributed to the various bodies based on tonnages then potentially they could do the work internally themselves or hire an external consultant to assist in the process to create export opportunities. With the money going in, we don’t see the true benefit. The smaller guys probably see more benefit than us. Since Hydra has been involved it has been a 1000% improvement, I am not critical but imagine if this money went straight to those associations to administer that process. (14)
• My view is there should be less focus on where government should put funds i.e. not with the large producers who have enough money to do it themselves but put more emphasis on small to medium wine enterprises who don’t have the funds to get into export or national markets to do things. Stop that which means then if you do programs overseas you can’t charge producers a lot of money to participate as with the costs you will only get the big guys who will continue to expand. There should be more money to do more things. (16)
• Outbound activities – sometimes there are a few issues say with US people not being in the market in the right way. Outbound missions need to be appropriately structured and resourced. The Development Commissions in the Great Southern and South West have collaborated with the CCIWA, DPIRD and Wines of WA to coordinate them. Producer associations are now looking to take the lead on them but they are not without their challenges. Internally we can wrap resources around that with Tradestart direct relationships and internal staff to redirect activity. The Producer associations generally are a one man show and lack the resources to wrap around it. If you neglect things or get behind then it becomes an issue. Trade missions
are important but you can’t have a scatter gun approach, you should only go to select markets, and then go back to resolidify the market and relationships. How do you do it? It needs to be informed by the markets the producers want to grow or access. Which markets are the right markets? We are high value wines, not cheap wines. (18)
• I would like to see a movement away from the large quantity of events per mission and the speed dating that occurs when we have international visitors; reduce the number of wineries or site visits and with the few we do – do them really well. Buyers come to our region and/or WA and it isn’t working. If it’s agreed that our natural environment is a major feature and part of what we are selling, then I believe that there would be a greater benefit from a Great Southern point of view to host tasting / food / hospitality on site in our natural assets – i.e. Stirling Ranges Bluff Knoll / Castle Rock / The Gap or even the Whaling station in Albany. This then gives some neutrality to the setting and no winery is given an advantage so it’s a fairer playing field. Each time I have attended these trade missions the buyers are exhausted, blurry, and overwhelmed. I’ve had buyers write to me and say they can’t drink for a week after due to the alcohol intake in one trip. I understand that lots of people want their share or demand an event but this is at the sacrifice to many other producers. (15)
• Less of events like the US Sommelier competition; if you look at the results on markets I don’t know if it’s sensible as it was a lot of money for a poor return. ROI is important. (19)
• They are not collaborating to find out the broader viewpoint which always causes a rift i.e. if you take Margaret River wines to Singapore, they know Margaret River but if you take them to South Korea they have no clue. We should be promoting Western Australia as it has the word Australia in there. Unfortunately, some regions believe there is more international awareness there, but it is not in the general consumer sector which needs more awareness grown. There are different ways it should be promoted, and that regionality is suited to the export market whereas domestically you can use Margaret River. (19)
• General comments
• Nothing really, they are doing great things. It was heavy handed on the export market but that is now being addressed. (2)
• We as a business are working better with Wines of WA than we ever have and there is more advanced planning with the budget and signing off to allow us to do it but the most ridiculous thing is the bureaucracy with booking airfares. We want to do a roadshow in November, and we can’t buy a plane ticket until the new financial year. It doesn’t make sense, I don’t understand how their accounting works as you can accrue it, and as a producer we want the best priced airfare. (5)
• I am not sure there are quite a few activities that didn’t result in anything because if you look at the end of 2024 and look at the world it is now going into a global recession. But in the long term it will work, and it is important. (6)
• I am surprised and glad they are seeking feedback. No one ever does, no one sees the result of the work and it is great they that are bothering to get feedback. (6)
• I like the fact the EGP has been broad brush focused – it is a case not one suits all but by presenting multiple opportunities it is maximising opportunities for producers. I don’t want to see it become too focused, but more so maximise success with a broad brush. (7)
• I don’t think there should be less of anything, I think it is a matter of covering different bases. Some people said Masterclasses are not as successful as there is often a lot of effort that goes into them and if the producer is not attending it is hard to get feedback. Tradeshows – there was one show that we attended overseas – ProWine in Germany which was a trade event. The feedback was that the crowds at the event were down, Germany is expensive, and a lot of people went to Wine Paris instead. (20)
• Less is more, let’s do something well rather than lots. (15)
Has participation with EGP supported your efforts in the targeted market?
Has your participation with EGP supported your efforts to increase sales/profitability in the targeted market? Export only
a. Can you please provide examples where activations have proven successful and/or not so?
Successful
Respondents shared numerous examples of successful activations, particularly in export markets such as the UK, Singapore, China, Thailand and Indonesia. Several participants noted that programs like Asia On-Off Trade and Wine Connection led to direct sales, improved market access and enhanced brand recognition. One producer reported a quadrupling of sales in major UK retailers like Morrisons and Tesco due to retail promotional support, while another achieved listings in prestigious venues like The Ivy in the UK thanks to program funding.
Wine Connection’s retail activation in Singapore was frequently mentioned as a strong success, with several producers reporting large orders, ongoing listings, and deepened customer relationships. Inbound visits were also valued when they involved high-quality trade and media, helping to build long-term awareness, especially in the UK and Japan. Some activities led to initial orders in China, with expectations for continued growth.
Other respondents said the program helped build PR and marketing exposure, with tools like the Wine Blast podcast or masterclasses proving effective in communicating their story and lifting brand visibility, even if sales outcomes weren’t immediately measurable. Regional brand awareness, particularly for Margaret River and the Great Southern, was seen as having improved due to ongoing participation in the program.
Some respondents stated that despite participation, they had not yet seen a measurable increase in sales. Events in markets like Thailand, Germany and Canada were cited as examples where no tangible results were seen, and there was frustration over a lack of follow-up or feedback from those activations.
A few producers acknowledged that while the program helped reduce costs or supported existing relationships (such as with distributors), this did not necessarily result in new sales. In some cases the financial support was minimal compared to the cost of participation, and any resulting business was attributed more to their own efforts than to the EGP program itself.
Others reported that introductions and early conversations had occurred, but most contacts did not respond to follow-ups or develop into meaningful partnerships. While there was value in the awareness the program generated, it often did not translate into concrete outcomes.
Some earlier activities were seen as poorly executed, but most agreed that over time the program has improved and is better targeting suitable markets. There was general support for focusing on less traditional wine markets with emerging middle classes, where WA wines can differentiate without competing head-to-head with larger players.
At the regional level, participants believed the program had successfully helped build the Margaret River brand and raise the profile of WA wines overall, even if individual outcomes varied.
Comments
• Positive
• It helped us in the UK market through brand awareness and familiarisation of the region. The Wineglass podcast was positive where they brought out the key UK wine media and this was helpful. I am a big fan of inbound famils with buyers and media. When you bring them into the region you can tell a better story. The UK market is pretty distressed at the moment, so it is hard to separate the market versus activation awareness, but awareness has certainly improved. It is hard to quantify as it is a long burn with export and orders are lumpy and infrequent, so it is hard to get a trend. Our success comes from improved market access and general awareness of product. (1)
• It was successful with Singapore; we went over and we were supported to do a wine expo. And a direct result of that was we exported some wine but unfortunately there was no follow up sales because the connection was sold to a new owner who is not interested in fine wine. (2)
• In the UK we have successfully used both the retail distributor and retail promotional program to quadruple sales in Morrisons, Waitrose and Tesco. Each year we use the program to full effect. We are the biggest exporter in WA to the UK by a country mile. (3)
• With China two weeks ago, we used the Asia on off trade program to help get us set up for the Chengdu Wine Fair; it was fantastic with starting with a new distributor and launching in market. Singapore, Thailand and Indonesia we have used the same program to increase sales and develop further relationships with partners and customers. After each of those, we have had Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand all put in a purchase order with ongoing sales. (3)
• Yes, a little bit, we have gained a few customers for our clients in Vietnam and Singapore and Canada. There have been some good gains with ongoing sales and reordering from Vietnam. Although our strongest market is the UK, which I found myself. (4)
• China is certainly on the improve, we started to get some activity on the back of recent roadshows so that is a big tick. It is too early to talk about the success as it was in November, but we had some first up orders and there hasn’t been time for repeat orders. But we have had good growth from that roadshow and believe we will get more. It has laid a solid foundation for growth. We will try to do one in the US in July. Despite the current volatility you need to put a positive spin on it the other way with the Australian dollar dipping so it makes it cheaper for the importer etc. (8)
• It helps improve PR, marketing and branding but we haven’t had an increase in our sales or profitability. We went to Watsons Wine Week hoping it would help move existing stock in markets, and we also did Singapore, but it hasn’t resulted in Watsons placing another order. There was no follow up because the markets are in a consolidation phase. (6)
• We were involved in a good initiative in the UK where we had support from Wines to the World and as a result our wine was listed in the Ivy in the UK. The Ivy consists of 160 restaurants which is great for us. We wouldn’t be able to afford that opportunity without the sponsorship through the EGP.
The program ran during our busiest period from October last year and finishes in May. As a result the top three sommeliers are coming out to WA to visit Margaret River, as part of an incentive for pushing wine they go back as ambassadors for WA and particularly Margaret River. (11)
• We picked up a small piece of business in Japan from an inbound visit, so we have had some success with small repeat sales and seems to be still ongoing. Otherwise, we haven’t seen anything else but it doesn’t mean we won’t continue as you don’t know as all of these things behind the scenes help add to the profile of WA and wines out of WA. (12)
• We started exporting 3 years ago and we started with Vin Expo in Singapore. We had just started exporting before that happened but that event helped solidify it. We have had an increase in sales but not heaps. It is not a hugely quantifiable increase. The Asia On Off program has put our wines in places in a difficult market at a time that it would not have been possible for us. With the Japan activation the program has hooked us up with a distributor that could potentially sell our wines. (13)
• The Wine Connection retail promotion was a successful activation for Cherubino as it allowed us to actively promote new to market products through a variety of channels. Particularly the Wine Connection tasting was a fairly effective sales and brand communication tool. Running a masterclass allowed us to increase sales across the tasting event and we have now depleted an entire SKU with Wine Connection, resulting in a permanent listing with them. Furthermore, the Wine Blast podcast with Peter Richards allowed us to tell the story of Cherubino across both the Great Southern and Margaret River regions in a unique and engaging format. Developing relationships with key media in an extremely important export market (UK) for us was also beneficial. The podcast was leveraged through our distributor and their PR channels. (14)
• Lots of sales have come out of wine missions and resulted in an increase in brand recognition of WA and the Great Southern. There have been several outcomes – sales for new entries, new wines etc. (16)
• The Great Southern statistics are good and up in value and volume which is good when other areas are not as good. From a regional perspective it is very positive for us. It is difficult to determine if the exact growth is due to the partnership or other things going on or from winning a wine tender. (18)
• The main one was Wine Connection in Singapore which focused on building relationships; we had 3 different producers get sizeable orders through that retail program. Buyers came out on an inbound trade visit; producers met them and built a relationship that led to sales. And then they ran a retail promotion in that market in Singapore which producers went over for. (20)
• No increase in sales
• We have done events for Thailand and that didn’t result in anything for us and Germany and Canada – we are yet to find out what happened – did they even taste our wine? Feedback would be good. (2)
• None, we haven’t achieved a sale as result of the EGP but that is as much to do with our own business and objectives more so than a reflection of the EGP. We have tried a few things that haven’t resulted in anything. That is not to say that it is not successful, I don’t blame the program. (7)
• We have had minimal increase in sales, but our participation in the EGP didn’t increase our sales. An activity we were involved in 12 months prior helped us from a cost perspective and helped our distributor run some events in Singapore. We already had our distributor, but it gave us an opportunity to do some promotional work through some funding through the program. This has helped our relationship and as a result has helped increase sales but not by a huge volume – it was beneficial. We have maintained our footprint and market share because of it. The problem since then is that most activities we haven’t been able to participate in. (8)
• I have had interest in our wine several times but not necessarily had deals. We have had conversations or introductions that have led to some things months later. How successful – I sold one pallet of wine but there has been introductions made through the program because of the awareness of the program. It has been of positive benefit but not really resulted in many sales. (9)
• There is no data to say that it has improved. The $943 funding we got didn’t get us a sale, it helped pay some costs. The irony is that we have now got restaurants we supply in Bali but that came from our own work. The event cost us $6000 so it was pretty deficient in the level of support provided. (10)
• No success yet, we have met people but it hasn’t gone any further. I would say that 75% don’t even respond to your follow up contact and only 10% continue a dialogue beyond two emails. (15)
• General comments
• Some earlier activities were poorly thought through, but nothing has failed. (1)
• The whole brand WA in selected markets has improved i.e. we target Thailand as a growth market, our view is we want markets where we don’t have to compete against the big guys i.e. South Australia. China is different as it can soak up lots of wine. We should be better at it and continue to focus on markets that are not traditional wine drinkers but have middle class people who want to drink wine, rather than the big markets. (16)
• At a regional level what we are trying to do is build the Magaret River brand and there is a lot of work that has been done. We have created awareness and got exposure for the brand in export markets through our involvement in the program. This has been reflected in exposure through the media, people being here and outcomes in wine show results. (17)
b. How did you find the EGP program to work with? (communication, delivery, or follow-up)
Many respondents shared positive feedback about their experience with the EGP program which is run by Hydra and overseen by Liz Mencel. Feedback particularly highlighted the strong communication, professionalism, and responsiveness of the program team. Several producers described Liz as highly organised, hardworking and effective, praising her for her follow-up, coordination and deep understanding of both the wine industry and export markets.
Participants appreciated the clarity of information shared through event announcements and registration processes. The coordination of activities, production of supporting materials (such as tasting booklets), and follow-up communication were all cited as well-executed. Some producers noted that event instructions and deadlines
were well communicated, and they valued being proactively contacted about opportunities. There was also recognition that the program has improved over time, becoming more targeted and responsive to industry needs. Respondents felt the EGP program helped provide unique and worthwhile opportunities that would be otherwise unattainable.
Despite the overall positive sentiment, some respondents noted areas for improvement. A common concern was the lack of feedback following participation in events, with several producers saying they did not receive any insights about how their wines were received or whether the activity led to results. They felt this limited their ability to assess the value of their participation or make informed decisions going forward.
Another concern was around timing and administrative burden. Some participants said the program’s requirements for claiming subsidies and submitting reports had become overly detailed and time-consuming, especially when coinciding with peak workloads like vintage. Others felt the application and budgeting process was clunky and difficult to navigate.
A few respondents raised concerns about Hydra acting as a consultant to run industry activities. Concerns were raised that much of the program’s effectiveness currently depends on one key person, Liz and they questioned the long-term sustainability once the contract ends. The risk is that important industry knowledge, intellectual property and relationships might be lost if the structure changes or if internal capacity is not built within Wines of WA.
One respondent expressed frustration with overinvolvement and lack of autonomy, claiming their organisation had invested significant effort in guiding Hydra, only for the consultant to take over parts of the program. Others commented that while working relationships had occasional ups and downs, collaboration had generally been productive and respectful.
A stakeholder mentioned the need for more direct representation and influence in program decisions, particularly where regional development commissions or associations are involved in the program’s activities.
Comments
• Positive comments
• The program has been well put together by Hydra; Liz Mencel has been very productive and good at follow-up. The governance structures around the program have given her good guidance and it is has being a well-run program. Communication is strong and she has reported through to the steering committee as per the terms of her engagement. (1)
• Liz is pretty good, tries hard. It is a tough market in export. The emails are clear, and opportunities are clear, it is just whether you want to get involved in them. (4)
• Very good, I don’t really deal with them on a daily basis, my wife does more so. (5)
• It is all great – the product they deliver is great in terms of the tasting booklets, support and coordination of events and the communication. (6)
• Really good communication – it is terrific. There are times where I have put my hat in the ring to participate and the communication about the events and the instructions are very clear and followed up. I feel the program is delivering, and not just paying lip service to things. (7)
• It is fine, very professional, and easy to deal with, communication is good. Any events we are involved in the communication is great and they have followed up with everything. (9)
• I have no problems with Hydra they are well regarded, and it is a well-run organisation. I haven’t dealt with them a lot directly. My sense is that they were struggling to find events of relevance, but that has improved. The delivery of the program is good and communication is fine. (10)
• No issues, they are really good. There is a lot of communication. The follow up is fantastic rather than me realising I am a week too late to be involved, they are aware of it and contact you so you don’t miss the opportunity. The communication is very good, positive, and active. (11)
• Terrific, very organised and the activities are well attended. They do follow up on target lists and provide any information they have they pass on. (12)
• No issues, the program is run well – different activities work for different wineries. (13)
• We have a great working relationship and is always mindful of us when it comes to opportunities. We have had great access to money can’t buy experiences or opportunities that are worthwhile rather than throw lots of money at advertising, wine shows etc. Liz has been highly communicative, very thorough, and communicated the opportunities and the wider team has been easy to deal with and there is lots of information and it is clear. (14)
• The communication is excellent, the quality of communication is very strong. The execution is strong and Hydra personnel in WA are very experienced. The personnel understand the market and go over and beyond to deliver the program. (17)
• It has its swings and roundabouts; sometimes we get on well and other times we don’t but in general it is a pretty good working relationship. Sometimes we have differing views on how things should be done, we both want the same outcome, so we do work pretty well together. I am not sure of the funding that goes to paying Hydra. We have a mission going to Thailand and wine producers want to lead that one and Hydra stepped up with additional funding. When they need to troubleshoot it is done well. (18)
• Really good, Hydra has been fantastic and is very organised, we work well with her and the same with the GSDC. (20)
• Issues
• They do a good job with communications with regard to the programs they are going to do, the dates and the ease of registering interest. But there is not much follow up communication – it would be good to get some feedback and know how your winery/ wines performed, what reaction you got. It is a very blanket approach, but it could be tailored to individual wineries. (2)
• There is good follow up from Hydra, sometimes it takes a little while to get back to us but their timing when they want urgent answers is quite bad as it is in the middle of vintage at times when they know we are busy or Christmas. I struggle with that. I also struggle with the level of detail which has increased in requirements to claim subsidies. It is becoming increasingly laboursome and intensive and difficult for me. It never used to be so difficult, it is a pain when you are
flat out and the red tape is making it harder for something that already has approval. Everything else is good, it is a professional outfit, and I have long been a supporter as it has united people moving forward with lots of stakeholders. (3)
• Feedback - no one has given us much feedback, for Vin Expo we got a summary and that was the first time we have had follow up on our involvement. (8)
• I haven’t seen a single report as an industry participation from WOWA with a summary of events held and what was the success in terms of the number of people participating. The outcomes I am not sure of as it isn’t shared. (10)
• Feedback is limited on the success of events; i.e. we had 8 people out here and 6 got orders but we don’t get feedback like that, it would be nice. We don’t need specifics but we would like some information as it gives me confidence in going forward. (12)
• The EGP program is only working because of consultants. WoWA have spent their money on consultants and are shuffling invoices. It is purely because of Liz’s involvement on initiatives. I worry because if she wasn’t there it would be a waste of time and money. I would rather pay her directly. If she wasn’t there and they lost her they would be back to ground zero. What can they do if they are not paying her – this is the biggest problem at the moment as they haven’t got anyone in the organisation who can provide stability and importantly maintain the IP and connections and relationships. (14)
• My concern is the issue if you are outsourcing to a consultant, as soon as you stop paying, you lose your opportunity because it is a FFS arrangement. If Wines of WA aren’t paying Hydra then you don’t have access to the services but the thing is that they haven’t built those skills internally either. But you risk losing the rapport that Hydra has built up and the network. Often in trade the relationships you are build are the most important thing, that is my only concern. I am not certain of the structure going forward? If you cut them off, what is the impact when you have built up the network with trade starters, commissions and producers and the external client base to ensure you get the right people to events and activities. (18)
• Other comments
• Generally, it has been ok, the way we have had to apply for things is clunky with the interface and the way we have to put a budget together is not straightforward. We are involved in a combined project with Blackwood and Geographe regions. We have had to work hard to get some money for it but not much money. What is hard is that we are volunteers whereas other organisations have paid staff i.e. Margaret River. Liz is great and incredibly valuable for WA. The follow up is good. (8)
• There is good communication leading up to events and the follow up is good. I also work very closely with Glen Thomson from GSDC who is awesome. (15)
• Worked well with them, like all marriages there are ups and downs but all in all we have worked closely with them. The only issue is that we don’t have a direct say out of the GSDC as to what is going on and we have to put our thoughts to GSWPA, so no direct say. I think it has been agreed on where the two development commissions will have a seat at the table. (16)
(incl
c. Rate the communications (electronic) from WA Wines to the World and Wines of WA Rate on scale 1 - 10
Overall, respondents rated the communications from both WA Wines to the World and Wines of WA positively, with most scores falling between 7 and 10. For WA Wines to the World, 85% of respondents rated communication at 7 or above, with 40% giving it an 8, 30% a 9, and 15% a 7. A smaller number rated it as a 10 (5%) or a 6 (10%), indicating generally strong satisfaction with how information is shared electronically.
For Wines of WA, the results were similarly favourable. 80% of respondents gave a rating of 7 or above, with 45% rating communication at 8, 25% at 9, and 10% at 7. Only a small number rated it a 6 (10%) or a 10 (5%), while one respondent gave a lower score of 5.
Several respondents were confused and couldn’t differentiate between the two organisations without some assistance as they view them as essentially one and the same. A comment was that Wines of WA often shares or echoes content from WA Wines to the World - acknowledging this as intentional and helpful, ensuring producers don’t miss key information.
Comments
O -premise - chain (wine/specialty)
• Wines of WA have less staff, so I have rated them less. (4)
O -premise - independent
On-premise - independent
On-premise - chain
• Wines of WA they do regurgitate WA Wines to the World information. We get their newsletter or email and then the information is repeated. But that is its purpose, so there is no excuse for producers to not be aware of what is going on. (7)
DTC (direct-to-consumer) eCommerce
O -premise - chain (supermarket/convenience)
• Wines of WA I rated more as most of the communications comes through them. (9)
• I don’t receive a lot of communication from Wines of WA and there is less frequency. (14)
• Wines of WA communication is not as accurate or effective, or as easy to read or as timely. (17)
• I don’t think I am on the direct mailing list, I do get emails from Liz and Larry on an as need basis. I don’t receive general emails that I am aware of but that is probably not appliable as we work with them to do things not necessarily for them to communicate industry things. (18)
Wines of WA WA Wines to the World
Question 6
Prospective countries to target for export
Please indicate your top 4 prospective countries to target for export in the next period.
Prospective countries to
Southeast Asia, including Thailand, emerged as the most frequently mentioned prospective export market with 22% of responses selecting it as a key target. The UK at 17%, and China at 16% were also high on the priority list for wine producers looking to expand their exports. Japan at 14%, and the US at 11% followed closely, though there were mixed opinions on the US market. Some producers saw potential in Canada, which was chosen by 11% of respondents, particularly due to recent developments such as the delisting of American wines. The Nordic countries at 5%, and India at 3% were mentioned less frequently but still featured in export considerations. Additionally, UAE Dubai was mentioned by one respondent as a target export market.
The comments provided insight into the challenges and opportunities within these markets. The US market was highly polarising with some producers acknowledging the strong connections they have there, while others viewed it as volatile and too risky due to ongoing economic and political turmoil. China and the UK were seen differently, as some producers regarded China as a market with strong growth potential, while the UK was noted for its 15% increase in export sales despite new regulations making the market more difficult. Southeast Asia was widely preferred, with producers specifically aiming to expand their presence in Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam.
Some producers are already exporting to Singapore and Malaysia and are keen to build on that foundation. Japan and Canada were also identified as promising markets, with Japan being a focus for expansion and Canada presenting an opportunity due to its shifting approach to American wines. Several producers emphasised the importance of diversification in exports, stating that relying on a single market was too risky and that spreading their exports across multiple countries was a better strategy.
Individual Respondents
Comments
• US was a good one, but we have back tracked on that now as it is a shit show. We have a massive connection network over there, so we do have a built-in network but are not so sure. UK is difficult over there with the new rules but again we have got networks. (2)
Relative ranking by Respondents
• US and China are in turmoil; they are complicated countries for us as a small producer and not worth the risk and volatility. (7)
• I am not convinced about the US market but that is more personal and about the current state of play. We want to target Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Japan specifically. We currently already export to Singapore and Malaysia. (8)
• I want to keep growing US and Japan, and I also see Canada as an opportunity with everything that is going on in the US. (9)
• I see Canada as an opportunity with them delisting American wines. (10)
• Sales exports to the UK are up 15%, China has lots of growth, US is a major market for WA wine. (11)
• The tariffs have changed things a little bit, SE Asia, China and the UK, not the US but I would like to see US and Canada together. (16)
• The US is still very important. I don’t like to have all our eggs in one basket, you need to spread it around – it is hard to pick. (17)
• Southeast Asia but within that we want to focus firstly on Singapore as we want to grow that, Vietnam, and Thailand and then Japan. The US is too difficult, and the UK is too far away. (13)
• Other markets – UAE Dubai. (14)
Question 7
EGP aligned wine producer efforts with market development activities and leveraged funds
Can you outline where the EGP has or may have linked wine producer efforts up with other market development activities and leveraged funds with other parts of industry?
Many respondents confirmed that the EGP program has successfully collaborated with other organisations to link wine industry efforts with broader market development initiatives and leverage funding from multiple sources. Notable examples include partnerships with regional Development Commissions such as the Great Southern Development Commission (GSDC) and the South West Development Commission (SWDC), where food and wine have been jointly promoted through inbound and outbound trade missions, particularly in markets like Thailand and Singapore.
Several producers noted that WA Wines to the World, Wines of WA, and Wine Australia had worked together to co-fund events such as the ANZ Trade Tasting in London, leveraging both national and state-level resources. Specific activations such as Watsons Wine Week, the Matthew Dukes trade initiative in the UK, and the Aspen program were also highlighted as examples where additional funding and cross-agency collaboration helped amplify the impact of export promotions.
Some respondents emphasised that collaboration with Austrade, DPIRD and industry bodies like MRWA and GSWPA has become a regular and effective feature of how export activities are delivered. These efforts were seen as part of a broader model that minimises costs for producers by pooling resources from multiple stakeholders.
However, several respondents either were not aware of such collaborations or felt that coordination was limited. A few noted that while larger regions like Margaret River and Great Southern have the resources and structures to engage in joint funding efforts, smaller regions remain underrepresented due to limited organisational capacity.
Others indicated that while they personally had not been involved in co-funded or linked activities, they recognised the potential for collaboration in the future. In some cases, respondents expressed uncertainty or a lack of visibility into how funds were being leveraged, suggesting that more communication and transparency around partnerships could improve awareness and participation. There is clear support for continuing and expanding these partnerships, especially to ensure equitable access for smaller producers and to maximise industry-wide impact.
Comments
• Yes
• Tradestart and GSDC have taken a broader view on not just wine in export market development but tie it in with food i.e. outbound trade missions sent to Thailand and inbound missions into the Great Southern where food and wine are both showcased. (1)
• The ANZ trade tasting (end of January) in London - producers were subsidised a little bit to showcase wines with a shared table with funding from WA Wines to the World and Wine Australia. There was also Thailand where there was some travel subsidised and some inbound trade missions. (2)
• I know the SWDC have collaborated with GSDC to put on an event in Thailand and Singapore and producers could access funds. It shows two organisations are talking to each other and put on a joint program and it was successful. Otherwise, I am not fully aware and in my experience organisations don’t necessarily like working together and it very rarely works well as everyone has their own objectives and budget. (3)
• The Development Commissions do a bit, but they don’t seem to talk to each other with the exception when they bring people down to the region i.e. SWDC and Wines of WA. I don’t see a lot of collaboration. (4)
• It played a role and linked up with the Export Market Development Grant – that was the only example where there was benefit for the Mathew Dukes trade activation in the UK. Watsons Wine Week there was also a grant that provided extra support and funding for export activities. (6)
• The best example is Wine Australia and where WA Wines to the World worked closely to leverage national funding to match other funding. It is important. One criticism of industry is that it can be quite segregated, and they are running off doing similar things without talking to each other, so some level of coordination is important. Predominantly that is trade fair and roadshow space where Wine Australia wants to put a stand together that they then link up with WA Wines to the World to get WA producers involved. (7)
• I am aware that they worked with the Development Commissions with some activities and provided funding, and the bigger regional association of Margaret River and Great Southern also contribute funds to activities. (8)
• They have worked with different associations particularly the GSWPA and MRWA to leverage funds for producers. Some of the smaller regions aren’t set up to leverage it properly and as a result producers are underrepresented because those regions don’t have the same association structure or resources. (9)
• The Aspen program was funded by MLA and Wines Australia was also a big contributor. I am aware of collaboration. (10)
• We do it all the time; GSDC, SWDC, DPIRD, JTSI and Austrade. We all put funding into programs. It is a model we have used which is the envy of Australia that provides least cost to producers. For example all trade missions, Wine Connect, outbounds – they all leverage funds we provide. We do Thailand – WOWA, SWDC, GSDC, Australia SW (tourism organisation) – it is all part and parcel of delivering the program. (16)
• Yes they are working closely with both Development Commissions, GSDC and SWDC, and working with Wine Australia and other bodies in markets and events. They also leverage funds from MRWA as well i.e. Thailand was funded through producers, GSDC, SWDC, EGP, Austrade, GSWA and MRWA. (17)
• It is generally what we do and how we work with Wines of WA and leverage each other’s funds. It has worked that way with our outbound and inbound missions, a couple of events in Perth, and regional based events. There is a lot of collaboration within. (18)
• We have worked with the Great Southern Development Commission, the collaboration is strong and they have invested jointly with us to do things like Singapore and Thailand in May, the same as the South West development Commission. The collaboration has been important. (20)
• Not really
• Not yet but I can see that happening. There could be a tourism factor in China and Scotland where wine and tourism work together. (5)
• Not really, it may be because I am removed from the state. The MRWA do a great job, they work collaboratively very well. Austrade are important in markets like Asia where there is not a government body and works in some smaller markets. Wine Australia is an important body but WA is starting to get a reputation that dilutes the effect with Australia at trade fairs. (11)
• Not really. (12)
• No not really, I can’t think of any - I know we also get some funds from DPIRD. (13)
• I can’t answer as I am not aware. (14)
• Not sure. (15)
• I am not aware, only that we leverage funds with Tradestart through the development commissions. (19)
Question 8
What would WA wine exports look like if the WA Wines to the World did not exist?
In your opinion what would WA Wine exports look like if the WA Wines to the World did not exist?
Many respondents believed that without WA Wines to the World, WA wine exports would be significantly weaker, especially for small and medium producers. Several noted that exports would likely be at 2021 levels or lower, with the industry more fragmented, less coordinated, and struggling for visibility in international markets.
Respondents credited the program with stimulating growth during challenging market conditions, helping to professionalise messaging, and increasing awareness and brand positioning for WA wines particularly in differentiating premium offerings from broader brand Australia. Some emphasised that without the program, wine exports would skew toward larger, commercial producers, leaving smaller players without access to critical support, funding or market entry opportunities.
Several producers felt that WA Wines to the World played a vital role in building industry cohesion, encouraging collaboration across regions, and giving producers access to education, networks, and export infrastructure they otherwise wouldn’t have. The program was viewed as a platform that not only provides funding but also helps break down barriers to market access, especially for those new to export.
While some acknowledged that larger producers would continue to export, they felt the program had been especially important in lowering the barriers for smaller wineries, allowing them to explore new markets and develop long-term strategies. Others suggested that, without the program, WA exports would be more sporadic and heavily reliant on individuals finding their own way.
A smaller number of respondents suggested that the absence of the program may not have made a significant difference, especially for larger or more experienced exporters. They acknowledged that the program offered valuable support particularly for smaller producers, but questioned whether it had made a measurable impact on export volumes overall, noting that growth could be attributed to individuals, market dynamics, or pre-existing export strategies.
Others believe that the program has laid a good foundation, its long-term value is yet to be fully realised. Some believed that with improved targeting and more efficient spending, the program’s contribution would become more visible over time.
A few respondents offered more critical perspectives, noting that while the structure is helpful, the success of the program hinges on individuals. They expressed concern that if key people were no longer involved, the program’s effectiveness could diminish rapidly. One participant argued that WA exports could still thrive without the program, provided the funding remained and was managed by others such as Austrade, Tradestart, and producers directly.
Concerns were also raised about over-reliance on consultants and the need for greater internal capacity within Wines of WA to ensure program continuity and industry leadership over time.
In summary, most respondents agreed that WA Wines to the World has played a critical role in supporting and growing WA wine exports, particularly by enabling access for smaller producers, encouraging collaboration, and boosting global awareness. While a few questioned the program’s broader impact, especially in quantitative terms, the general sentiment was that its absence would leave a noticeable gap in industry coordination, support, and market presence.
Comments
• Has made a difference
• It would be stuck back at 2021 levels at a maximum, it has really stimulated growth in a challenging time for industry. To some extent it has also brought industry together, although there are still some regional challenges. It has positioned industry for further growth. (1)
• WA could be further behind than we are, they do a good job and in the three years there are some great stories to be told and messaging is getting better as far as solidifying it and dispersing information and reaching more markets domestically and internationally. They are on the right track. (2)
• It would look very bad, diabolical – there would be some growth from some people but for middle and smaller producers no growth as they would ignore the export markets. The program has been critical in saving wine sales in export markets, critical. (3)
• It would look commercial, be non-premium wine and we wouldn’t be improving brand Australia as it would be generic and we would be losing our place in export markets. The program really helps brand Australia in a better way than the Australian wine industry has done in the past. There is more focus, and it is really diving deep into regionality and diversity and the great landscape for Australian wine and showcasing the difference. In 2000 with brand Australia there was kangaroos on wine labels and that was tarnished with a brush that identified it as cheap and commercial. (6)
• It wouldn’t provide us the funds to do activities and would have had a negative effect on sales. The program is essential to help producers access export markets. (5)
• It would be down obviously, a percentage. A lot of exports happen regardless as there are the big boys who focus on export, and they will do that and drive it regardless. It has helped but by how much it is hard to say. I think the biggest thing is that it has allowed smaller producers opportunities that wouldn’t otherwise have existed. It has allowed more to put their toe in the water, create better long-term objectives.
Bigger companies are driven, and EGP has contributed a little but hard to attribute it all to EGP. For us, we have had zero sales, zero volume but it has exposed us to the export market and given us food for thought. It may not have contributed to the current numbers but that is not to say it won’t moving forward. Export is about sustainable growth long term. (7)
• It would not have grown as much as it has, and it would be more fragmented, and WA would be less visible in international markets. (8)
• It would be focused on the big producers and would be haphazard as having a centrally focused group or body is the most important thing. The whole marketing and education piece is our most important strategic goal and we can’t do that without money and a centrally focused consultant or group. It could be run by Wines of WA as we need someone to oversee it and make it happen. I am open to different structures, the education and marketing piece is WA as a whole or the regions and not individual wineries. They are part of the story. (9)
• There would be a lot less exports. It is all about awareness, and compared to the Victorian wine regions it is incredible the difference in the perception of WA wines particularly Margaret River wines in a short period of time whereas equally good wines out of other wine regions haven’t developed the same profile. When you talk about WA wines, Asia is not aware say of the Swan Valley. Without the program there would less relationship building. (11)
• I am assuming that they would decline. I assume people would find their own path to export but it would be more difficult and have barriers. Whereas with the EGP there is quite good support, good programs/ activations and funding provided. Smaller producers who don’t have an easy avenue to market would drop out of the market. It is easier to target the export market with support. (13)
• The program has contributed to some growth, but some companies already have their foot in the door in export markets, there is some growth clouded amongst that. (15)
• It would be where it was 3-4 years ago where industry wouldn’t work together as they were doing their own thing. It was a disjointed approach to wine exports. They certainly wouldn’t have got the results they have got in the last few years and its programs would have been run by one organisation rather than lots working together. (16)
• They would be shrinking quite dramatically in this current climate with wine consumption globally shrinking. It is helping us hold share and even grow share in some instances. It is valuable. (17)
• It would look different, there would be less funding going into supporting exporting activities and it would be far more difficult to deliver. Industry likes it because there is money attached. (18)
• It would be reduced, the program is important in helping to bring the industry together, that is one of the big things. Whereas if it didn’t exist, people wouldn’t have the same level of support, or get the education and wouldn’t have the same contact network reach that the program brings. (20)
• Not much difference
• I don’t think it would have changed a lot, it is up to individuals. It does give people a platform to go and makes it easier to get into markets or at least have an opportunity to get into markets to talk to people and open a market. It would be harder for smaller producers and those without export experience. The program supports that very well, as it gives people an idea. It is also utilising channels as well to gain market access – if they weren’t there, it would be hard for smaller producers. (4)
• It wouldn’t be very different at the moment. It is unfair on the program given the time frame and baby steps, but I am not critical of the program but more so where it is targeted. I don’t think it will be like it for the longer term, it will work out a way to deliver better, more effectively and spend money more wisely which will be a positive for WA wines. (10)
• It probably wouldn’t look different. There is benefit in the EGP in having an organising body coordinating and representing it is essential. It hasn’t made that much of a difference, it really comes down to the state of play in markets. (12)
• Six years ago we were exporting 12% total production, what is it now? Wines of WA have spent their money on consultants. It is because of Liz’s involvement on initiatives. (14)
Question 9
Can you please identify the importance of the International Sales Channels
Can you please identify the importance of the following International Sales Channels to allow this program to support your marketing efforts. How would you rate - out of 10, where 10 is high?
a. the strength of the identified sales channels to your business, and
b. what would you like the balance to be in 4 years’ time?
Wine producers indicated that all export sales channels are expected to grow over the next four years, with the most significant increases anticipated in on-premise independent, offpremise independent, and eCommerce channels.
Currently, the strongest export sales channel is off-premise chain (wine/specialty stores), with producers rating it at 58%, followed by off-premise independent retailers (41%) and on-premise independent venues (36%). These channels are viewed as relatively solid foundations for export sales, with producers expressing a desire to further strengthen these relationships.
In four years’ time, producers hope to see the most growth in on-premise independent (from 36% to 71%), off-premise independent (from 41% to 74%), and eCommerce (from 20% to 39%). This reflects a strong aspiration to build brand awareness and consumer loyalty in more premium, boutique, and relationship-driven channels, as well as through digital platforms that allow for direct engagement.
While direct-to-consumer (DTC) channels are also projected to nearly double (from 14% to 33%), many producers expressed reservations about their viability in export markets. Several noted that high shipping costs, complex regulations, and taxes in foreign countries make DTC prohibitively expensive and logistically challenging. Some smaller producers added that they lack the resources to manage DTC internationally, relying instead on distributors to manage retailer relationships and channel strategies.
Off-premise chains in supermarkets and convenience stores are currently among the least utilised channels, but producers still hope for significant growth (9% up to 31%). However, there were concerns that these chains are highly pricedriven, often not well aligned with WA’s premium wine positioning. A few respondents pointed out that their distributors are responsible for managing channel sales, particularly for smaller producers who lack the scale to approach retailers directly.
Comments
• We have no interest in chains and shipping costs make DTC not viable. (6)
• For a small producer, we focus on distributors – they drive underlying channels. We are too small to focus on retailers, the distributor does that for you. (7)
• How do you sell DTC – my issue is someone made an inquiry to buy two bottles of wine from Portugal and they were $100 each but the freight and other government costs etc. make it too expensive. How do you fix that? (9)
• Off premise chains (wine/specialty) in export markets are difficult as they are price driven and more in the lower price range. (11)
• We have a Distributor who is selling through most of these channels. The sales are ok but not amazing, but we would like to grow them. (13)
• There is no DTC in export, it is impossible to navigate, we have tried and it is a waste of time and money because of transport costs and taxes at the other end. (14)
In the new IGP there is the intention of maintaining a focus on Export, however there will be an equal focus on a Domestic marketing program.
Question 10
Can you please identify the importance of the Domestic Sales Channels
Can you please identify the importance of the following Domestic Sales Channels to allow this program to support your domestic efforts. How would you rate - out of 10, where 10 is high?
a. the strength of the identified sales channels to your business, and
b. what would you like the balance to be in 4 years’ time?
Wine producers identified cellar door and wine club sales as their strongest current domestic sales channel, and the one they most want to expand over the next four years, aiming to grow from 56% to 86%, a net increase of 45%. Many producers see this channel as core to their business, offering high margins, direct customer engagement, and strong brand storytelling opportunities.
Other direct-to-consumer (DTC) channels including events, online sales and platforms like Naked Wines were also well utilised (55%), with producers aiming to grow this to 77%. Despite this, there were concerns about declining online wine sales, with one respondent observing a downward trend like what has been seen in the US and calling for a better understanding of why that decline is occurring.
Direct wholesale through salespeople or agents and distributors within WA were reported as important but slightly less prominent, with modest growth expected (from 46% to 55% and from 59% to 69%, respectively). These channels are valued for maintaining local presence and building relationships with restaurants and retailers.
The greatest relative increase in expected use is for interstate distributors, growing from 43% to 67%; a sign that producers want to expand their reach across Australia and see more value in developing out-of-state partnerships.
National retail chains were rated as a smaller channel both currently (34%) and in the future (41%), indicating that while some growth is anticipated, producers still prefer more direct or regionalised routes to market possibly due to pricing pressure and limited control over brand representation in large chain environments.
Rating Domestic sales channels current and in 2030
Distributor - WA
Cellar door & wine club
Other DTC –events, online, ecom,
Direct wholesale –salesperson/agent
Distributor - Interstate
National retail chains –direct chain relationships
Relative ranking by Respondents Rating 2025 Rating 2030
Comments
• Cellar door is most important to us, we don’t do a lot of events as there is only two of us. We are interested in speciality tourism offering high level resorts and cruise ships. (2)
• With DTC online wine sales are in decline for everyone, we are following the US model, year on year it is in decline – we need to understand why it is declining? I would like to see it improve. (14)
Question 11
Is collection and provision of domestic sales data an important factor?
Wine Australia provides the industry with current export sales data including by region, variety and country. The information also tracks volume and pricing. There is currently very limited data around our domestic market.
a. Please indicate if you consider collection and provision of domestic sales data to be an important factor?
The vast majority of respondents (85%) said yes, they consider the collection and provision of domestic sales data to be important. Producers emphasised that data is essential for measuring business performance, understanding market trends, and making strategic decisions. Several noted that without domestic data, it’s hard to benchmark performance, allocate resources effectively, or compare the WA wine category to other states and regions.
A few respondents were realistic about the challenges of collecting domestic data, citing producer reluctance to share sales figures and the lack of a central reporting mechanism like customs data used for exports. They suggested incentives may be needed to encourage participation and overcome competitive sensitivities.
A small minority of respondents (15%) did not see value in collecting domestic data. Some felt they already received sufficient feedback directly from customers or were sceptical of the reliability and usefulness of available data sources like Nielsen scan reports. Others expressed discomfort with sharing their own business data, citing concerns about competitiveness or questioning the statistical accuracy and interpretation of such figures.
In summary, most producers see domestic sales data as a critical gap that, if filled, could support smarter decision-making and better strategic planning. However, there is also recognition of the challenges in collection, standardisation and industry participation, which would need to be addressed to make such a system viable.
Comments
• Yes
• It is critical, you can’t measure success without the data. (1)
• It is good to get and gives you a better idea as to how you rate as a region compared to other regions, and important to compare WA to the east and intrastate. (2)
While some have access to sales data from their own distributors, they acknowledged that it doesn’t give an insight into the broader WA wine sector, including consumer preferences or sales volumes by variety, region or channel.
Some producers stressed the need to understand not just what is selling, but also why wine consumption is declining, what alternatives consumers are turning to, and how best to target and retain domestic buyers. Others recommended tracking imported wine sales and combining this with domestic data to gain a clearer view of the competitive landscape.
• It is very important to now baseline how far it’s fallen but it’s very hard to get domestic data. We have our own from our distributor, but it very rarely gives perspective on the WA category. We pay for Coles and Endeavour data; it only provides data on our products not necessarily the WA category, it’s not great data, and it is expensive to buy.
• Yes, it would be important to have a guide on what is selling on the east coast and in our own back yard but it will be impossible to collect. No one wants to share it whereas with export, we can get the figures because Wine Australia sees it. (4)
• Yes, there is no data and I don’t know what % wine is sold domestic versus export, the challenge is in capturing the data, currently. (6)
• Yes, it would be interesting to know, it is not critical for success but it is important. (7)
• We need to understand who is buying what product, the sales channels and the most important thing is to understand why is the wine consumer market shrinking? What else are they drinking and buying? Most of my sales are direct. Why are people not drinking wine – we need to look at that? How does it help sell more wine, we need to understand who is our wine consumer, what do they want to buy and where do they want to buy? (8)
• Yes, we should also collect import data so we can get a good picture overall about sales, varietals sales, how much is imported and sold versus the domestic sales including restaurant, trade etc. (9)
• Yes, it is the only way to measure business, we get data through Wine Australia but that only deals with broad categories of product, off premise not on-premise. It would be good to get a greater breakdown of sales by variety by state and on and off data. (10)
• Yes, it helps make decisions when you see trends i.e. varietal or style trends - it would be great to get on trade data. (11)
• Yes, it is important data, the more data you can get, the easier it is to benchmark your own business. (12)
• Yes, we don’t know what is going on, we don’t know where we should put funds or all our efforts. (16)
• Yes, we would love it if it was possible, but I don’t know how feasible or realistic it would be to collect. (17)
• Yes, but very much doubt individual producers will share it, you need a carrot. Export is easy to track with customs data, but that doesn’t exist for domestic. It would be interesting to see what did exist, a lot is anecdotal from producers. The more information you have is key as it helps determine which market is good to get a strong foothold. (18)
• Yes, I think the Australian market is a strong potential market that hasn’t had a lot of focus on it, and if you don’t measure it then you don’t know if there’s opportunity there or not. (19)
• It is difficult but important so we know how we are tracking. We know we have done well with export but the figures for domestic are very limited. It is good to track and
benchmark against other regions in terms of what we are turning over as a whole in different channels. It is a matter of people wanting to share it, and that is the challenge as it is competitive. (20)
• No
• Not really, because I get feedback from my customers. AC Nielsen data is good but I don’t use it. It would be handy to know but it won’t move the dial too much. (5)
• I am not interested in sharing data and don’t like that stuff in general. If it was more specific and they were asking for it for good reason, then I would reassess it. (13)
• No, it is very hard to collect – if you get Nielsen scan data and look at on premise reports they are meaningless – how do you collect it and average it out, what statistical means can it support – all data is mostly meaningless. If you look at the Number 1 distributor in WA you might be horrified, it doesn’t mean anything but potentially I could paint myself into a corner from a business point of view. Wine Australia are looking at ways to justify their existence, they have failed us monumentally. (14)
b. Would you be prepared to provide sales data across a range of sales channels to an independent provider which would be amortised and shared at the granular level maintaining anonymity for the individual winery?
Most wine producer respondents (87%) indicated they would be willing to provide sales data, provided that strict anonymity and confidentiality are guaranteed. Many producers emphasised the importance of ensuring data is de-identified, and that it is shared only in aggregated form to protect the commercial sensitivities of individual wineries.
Several respondents noted that they were already informally sharing sales data in trusted circles or had participated in similar initiatives in the past, such as the Wine Australia DTC report or Deloitte’s anonymous benchmarking surveys. They expressed openness to a more formalised data collection, especially if managed by a neutral, independent organisation with no vested interest. Trust in the process and clarity about who manages and accesses the data were cited as key factors in their willingness to participate. Some respondents mentioned that they had seen data misused or poorly protected in the past and
would only feel comfortable if the system was transparent, well-governed and operated with integrity.
There were also practical concerns raised, including the time and resourcing required to provide accurate data, especially for small producers operating with lean teams. Others noted that voluntary participation alone may limit data quality, as it depends on how many and which producers contribute.
A couple of respondents (13%) expressed reservations or outright reluctance to share data. They cited concerns over the sensitive, commercial nature of the information, how it might be used by competitors, and whether it would meaningfully impact decision-making. Some suggested that such data could potentially influence strategic behaviour if not properly safeguarded.
One respondent proposed that data collection could potentially be tied to APC (Agricultural Produce Commission) fee reporting, or run through government agencies like Austrade, which already manage trade-related data and could support confidentiality through established systems.
In summary, most producers support the idea of sharing sales data if handled properly; confidentiality, independence, and purpose-driven governance are seen as essential for participation. There is recognition of the value such data could bring, but also a clear need to build trust and minimise risks to ensure broad industry engagement.
Please note that Stakeholders were not included in this question and data.
Comments
• De-identified data I am willing to share. (1)
• As long as it is anonymous. (2) (4) (5)
• It depends on who the independent person was, I have seen data shared freely amongst people when supposedly it is in safe hands i.e. consultants. I am comfortable doing it, if it is kept safe and remains confidential. It has to be someone who has no vested interest. (3)
• I think I would, confidentiality is super important, only share aggregated data if the basis is clear and trustworthy as it is sensitive data. Everyone would like to know as long as the integrity of the process is ensured. (6)
• Wine Australia do have a DTC report which is voluntary to participate in which we contribute to but I am not sure how many people do. It breaks down ecommerce, wine clubs, cellar door sales. Voluntary participation data is only as good as the people who participate. (8)
• Yes, the limitation of data sharing I see is that we are all running so lean so it could fall down with getting the data. (9)
• Anonymously yes, we do it informally now between ourselves within a group where we share percentages. Deloitte used to do an anonymous benchmarking survey for all wine producers which was handy. (10)
• It happens all the time, out of Austrade we get an agreement if we work together and can match the two ends together i.e. supplier and buyer and we get confidential data, no individuality comes through. But there has to be confidentiality involved so that no one is known and it is an aggregate that should give you an idea through bottles shops, restaurants, retail etc. Perhaps provide sales data to Wines of WA, or government with Austrade and put into a CRM program that tracks it. We know already through Border Force where things are sold, maybe we could use that information but make sure it is confidential. They do provide volume data already because of APC fees. (16)
• Some would, some wouldn’t as it is commercial information and sensitive. Usually, you buy data and it is super expensive and only represents a percentage of the market, not the full market. (17)
• On a voluntary basis, potentially you could collect data when producers pay their APC fee and have some form of requirement to provide data on domestic market sales data. There is concern where the data goes and who utilises it because if you know there is a competitor in the market does that change your commercial decisions. (18)
Question 12
Prioritise the domestic markets
In developing the domestic marketing strategy, please identify your priority markets
Wine producers identified New South Wales/ ACT, Victoria and Queensland as their top priority domestic markets, collectively receiving the highest number of responses. These three eastern seaboard states were widely viewed as offering the greatest potential for growth, particularly due to their large populations and strong wine consumption.
Many respondents emphasised that Queensland presents a significant opportunity, as it lacks a dominant local wine industry, making it more open to interstate wines. However, several producers also flagged challenges such as recycling regulations and freight costs that make doing business in Queensland more complex and expensive.
Victoria and NSW were similarly prioritised for their market size and influence, though producers acknowledged that competition is high and logistics particularly for smaller businesses can be a barrier. Despite these challenges, respondents believe these markets offer meaningful opportunities for brand growth and increased presence.
In contrast Tasmania, South Australia and the Northern Territory were generally not considered priority markets. Producers felt that SA and Tasmania are parochial and already well served by their own local industries, while NT was seen as too small to justify investment.
Some producers expressed that WA, including Perth and their local regions, are already welldeveloped markets, with strong local support and brand familiarity. As such, while important, they were not considered a priority for marketing investment, as producers believe their presence is already established in these areas and it is easier to target.
Prioritise the Australian domestic markets
Relative
Stakeholders Producer South
Comments
• We need to focus on the 3 biggest markets on the east coast, you are wasting time in NT, and in Tasmania and South Australia because they have their own wine and are parochial. (3)
• We already sell into all states and want to continue to do some, all except the NT. (6)
• Others are difficult for us to look at with domestic marketing because of the freight factor if we want DTC – for a smaller business, is it worth chasing a market with freight costs. (8)
O -premise - independent O -premise - chain (wine/specialty)
On-premise - independent
On-premise - chain
eCommerce
DTC (direct-to-consumer)
O -premise - chain (supermarket/convenience)
Individual Respondents Relative
• How do we compete with South Australia? Queensland is a huge opportunity because there is no big wine region. But the downside is the different laws with recycling – more red tape as they have a 10 cents recycling program there it is not a national program. That would be a cost to business to pay more (10 cents) and an additional fee for 5c for administration of process of which the public are not aware. There is only one glass recycling plant and that is in South Australia, not near Queensland. For us the Queensland market comes at a cost along with the freight. (8)
Rating 2025 Rating 2030
• WA is the most parochial state, we should focus on Perth and WA. (16)
• From my perspective priority markets – the WA market is our biggest market but I think where producers need the least help along with local regions whereas with Victoria, NSW and Qld they need more help. (17)
• South Australia we will struggle with large volumes, the NT is not big enough and Tasmania is too small. (18)
• We put our prices up for the east coast to cover shipping. (13)
• Local and Perth market is already done, they are there people know them so we need to grow Victoria and NSW. (19)
Question 13
Potential activities and services to develop the domestic marketing strategy
To assist in developing the domestic marketing strategy, please rate the importance of these potential activities and services.
Forging links with regional tourism, accommodation, and food providers, as well as collaboration with Tourism WA and Australia’s South West, were seen as important by many. Several noted that these partnerships are key to growing wine tourism and should be an automatic part of the domestic strategy. However, there were concerns about overreach as some respondents believed that developing bookable experiences is not Wines of WA’s role and should instead be led by tourism or hospitality experts.
Wine producers rated funding for on-ground projects and regional activities and support for interstate domestic marketing and promotion as two of the most valuable potential activities, both receiving high scores and strong support. Respondents emphasised that good data is critical for strategic decision-making, understanding trends and benchmarking performance. Interstate promotion was seen as essential with many producers viewing markets like NSW, Victoria and Queensland as critical growth opportunities. In contrast, intrastate promotion (within WA) was rated slightly lower, possibly because producers already feel more established locally.
Respondents were more divided on the value of workshops to assist with finding and working with distributors. While a few welcomed the idea, others particularly those already working with distributors or operating small-scale direct models felt it was of limited relevance or not worth the additional cost.
The communication of relevant industry events and support for regional wine shows or awards received moderate ratings. While some saw value in these initiatives, others were more sceptical particularly around equity in judging and the effectiveness of awards programs
The communication of relevant industry events should be automatically shared amongst industry. Other suggestions for the domestic marketing strategy, as raised by respondents, include the need for freight and logistics solutions, noting that high transport costs are a significant barrier for WA wine businesses. They suggested that Wines of WA could play a role in negotiating shared or contracted freight arrangements to reduce costs and improve market access, particularly for smaller producers.
There was support for incorporating sustainability into the domestic marketing strategy, not just as a behind-the-scenes initiative, but as a consumer-facing message. Producers felt that educating consumers on sustainability initiatives such as reducing carbon emissions through local purchasing or efficient packaging could be a compelling way to promote WA wines.
A broader focus on wine tourism and destination development was also raised as a strategy, advocating for investment in making WA wine regions world-class visitor destinations of which ‘bookable experiences’ would be a tactic.
More support for regional wine associations was also raised, particularly those with limited staff or funding. They saw an opportunity for Wines of WA to support all regions, not just the established ones like Margaret River, with capacity-building, resources and strategic coordination.
Finally, several producers emphasised the importance of media relations and public relations strategy.
Collaboration with ASW, & TWA
Funding for on-ground projects andregional activities
Interstate domestic marketing and promotion
Reliable market and consumer data and analysis
Further regional accommodation, food, & tourism
Intrastate domestic marketing and promotion
Assistance with development of ‘Bookable experiences
Communication of relevant industry events and activities
Support for regional wine shows and/or awards
Assist producers to find and work with distributors
Potential activities and services to develop the domestic marketing strategy Relative ranking by Respondents
Comments
• Tourism data as it relates to the wine industryvisitation, accommodations nights etc. they are all measures of traffic within a region. (1)
• We already have distributors so I rate that low. (2)
• As a small business I am not paying a middleman to sell my wine, more costs, and less resources. (8)
• Bring key players and buyers to WA; it is important to have in market visits from buyers to our regions and very important from interstate. We need to get them in. (10)
• Accommodation, food and tourism activities as it is important to build wine tourism. Forging the link is how you do it and it is an effective way to build wine tourism. (17)
• Wine shows are a contentious issue i.e. how they’re done, who is judging and the equitability. (18)
• Forging links with other organisations to further regional accommodation, food and tourism links and collaboration with Australia’s South West and Tourism WA shouldn’t be questioned. It should already be part of their strategy. (19)
• Bookable experiences is not their role, they are again stepping into other people’s spaces. Wines of WA have no experience or understanding in that realm. It is important but not their job but more so others with the skills and experience in that sector. (19)
• I am happy to leave the domestic strategy to them and not get involved and there are enough in that space with local associations and the state association. (19)
• Other suggestions:
• Logistics and freight solutions – that is our biggest issue over here with the tyranny of distance and cost of freight. I would like Wines of WA to find a contract solution. (5)
• Education/ media/ PR - opportunity with get more consumers to eat drink and support local and especially something that is harnessed with the sustainability message. Eat drink local and cut out the major CO2 emissions of the wine industry and agriculture generally which is transport. Have an education message around the quality of wines and other reasons to support local based around sustainability. If you spend money on an Instagram campaign or billboard – what do we need to do? Within sustainability talk about being certified and aspiring to be more efficient at the winery –
the reality is an efficiency gain in the vineyard affecting say 20% of the pie and 30% of the pie is transport and 50% which is glass and bottling services. One of the biggest bangs, if you are doing all this - what message can we give to consumers rather than being all green – how can the consumer be involved in this change? It is about advertising and changing behaviours. (9)
• Building desirable wine destinations – driving through first-class wine tourism destinations in Australia and building those desirable wine destinations. Destination development to build wine regions to be world class. Bookable experiences is too narrow and different. It is more of a tactic to the strategy which should be ‘creating engaging unique wine experiences or wine campaigns for the east coast that will engage trade and consumers’ and around that have marketing, supporting regional capability and capacity building. (17)
• Capability and sustainability of knowledge and networks – this is a Hydra issue more so, a lot of these are activity focused. If a person develops intellectual IP and networks where does that sit? (18)
• Add support for regional wine associations – Wines of WA is the hub and they are the spokes. Other than Margaret River, investment into building skills and capability of that person or supplementing the resource. You need an essential person within WoWA who can work across all regions. I am not sure what others get i.e. resources but they all grapple with similar issues and rely on producer funded levies. You have some associations with more staff as opposed to those with 1 person or volunteers – how do you do that better and more effectively, and what are the efficiencies that WoWA could support? How do you utilise WoWA as that service provider? (18)
• Marketing strategy – sustainability. We need to touch on it. If we all work harder, it will be better for the industry. The big players are interested in that and where it has come from, how it is made and what the carbon footprint looks like. (20)
• Media relations and marketing e.g. the Barossa their media coverage is very strong, sharp, and polished. We don’t have a focus on that, it is an area of growing awareness of WA wines. (19)
• Media strategy. (20)
Question 14
Which marketing activities interest you most in Export markets?
Please cite 3 or 4 of your preferred activities:
Respondents outlined a number of marketing activities that interest them in the export market. The activity that had the most support was inbound trade and media visits; followed by Masterclasses; coordinated regional retail and ontrade promotions; social media campaigns; and distributor/ buyer matching.
Inbound visits were consistently identified as one of the most valuable marketing activities. Producers felt that bringing trade and media into WA wine regions provides a powerful opportunity to tell their stories, showcase their wines in context, and build long-term relationships. These visits were seen as more effective than trade fairs, allowing for deeper engagement and better conversion. There was a strong push for ensuring broader regional inclusion by hosting events in Perth to give smaller or less-resourced regions a platform, rather than only focusing on Margaret River and the Great Southern.
Trade masterclasses, particularly in markets like Singapore and China, were seen as effective tools for educating the gatekeepers - sommeliers, importers and hospitality staff. Many noted that educating the trade results in better sales outcomes, as they become ambassadors for the wines. However, some producers were frustrated by poor targeting of attendees, with concerns that some masterclasses involved participants who lacked real buying power.
Coordinated promotions in export markets especially those involving retailers and on-premise venues were highlighted as valuable and impactful. Producers reported success through programs that included in-market tastings, incentives, and social media campaigns, particularly when wellcoordinated and followed up. Several stressed that funding for in-market activations can significantly increase visibility and drive sales.
Social media campaigns were widely supported as a cost-effective and powerful tool for reaching both trade and consumers. Producers encouraged ongoing influencer partnerships and digital storytelling to boost regional and brand awareness, particularly in Asia-Pacific markets.
Regional roadshows, both domestic and outbound, were popular with producers seeing value in a two-stage model: first meeting potential buyers in their home market, and then bringing them to WA. Roadshows were seen as a practical way to build exposure in key domestic cities and were considered especially useful for relationshipbuilding and follow-up.
Opinions on distributor incentives were mixed. Some producers viewed financial incentives for distributors (e.g. offering bonuses for hitting order volumes) as essential in price-competitive markets like the UK. Others were sceptical of its effectiveness unless the distributor was already engaged. Distributor and buyer matching was supported by some, but a few producers felt it rarely worked as intended, preferring relationships to develop organically.
Producers saw high value in shared regional marketing tools like video content, photography and translated materials which help tell the broader WA wine story. This is particularly important for smaller wineries that lack inhouse marketing resources. There were calls for consistent regional branding and storytelling, especially for lesser-known regions.
Market entry programs were considered valuable for breaking into new countries and building consistent brand presence. Some producers called for more creative targeting of high-volume buyers, such as hotel and café chains in Southeast Asia, and collaboration with key influencers using platforms like WhatsApp and livestream tastings; models already used effectively in other industries. Others suggested support for international wine critics like James Suckling to visit and review WA wines, which has proven effective for generating sales.
While most marketing activities were generally supported, some respondents expressed dissatisfaction with masterclasses, saying they often attract the wrong people and lack sales outcomes. Others noted that distributor matching doesn’t always work and can feel forced.
A few raised concerns about program affordability, suggesting activities like trade shows or missions need to be more heavily subsidised to make participation viable for smaller producers.
Comments
• Inbounds
• In bound famils with buyers are effective and a lower cost way to do marketing. (1)
• Support other wine regions - Wines of WA understand there are other regions apart from Margaret River and Great Southern, they are the two who have got the most funding. Geographe is included in some other events. If you do things for the other regions, do it for Western Australia – fly people into Perth and do it in Perth and then you can have Pemberton, Swan Valley, Peel Geographe represented. Regions with the resources can pay money to bring people in from overseas to take to Margaret River and the Great Southern. Whereas an event in Perth can provide an opportunity for other regions to drive to and you can showcase the boutique regions of WA to incoming buyers. (4)
• Inbound activities and education about our wines. (9)
• Inbound visits from trade, not media – you also need to find a consumer element to help build demand i.e. Masterclass. Bring people here and include a consumer element with events/shows. (12)
• Inbound trade and media visits – but reduce the quantity of activities and aim for impact leveraging iconic WA locations and get visitors immersed into the region. (15)
• Inbound trade and media visits. (14)
• Inbound trade. (10)
• Visits from inbound buyers from targeted countries – it covers regional on trade and masterclass and social. The Asia on/ off activity was really good. (13)
• Inbound trade and media visits. (7)
• Inbound trade and media visits – it is about bringing the right people in to match what we are looking for. (8)
• Inbounds – more people jump on a plane in bound but more research needs to be done on them before they come out. (14)
• In bound trade and media visits. (16)
• Inbound trade and media visits. (17)
• Inbound missions – I feel provide more time and while we are still competing for attention, they get what they need from the person whereas trade fairs are more hit and miss. You can tell the story better with people in the region – there is more narrative. (18)
• Inbound trade and media visits. (20)
• Tradeshows
• Support for trade shows and outbound travel are important around the travel component, as most exporters have exhausted theirs. (1)
• More support for roadshows in China, it is our biggest market for all WA wine and our biggest opportunity and potentially trade shows. (3)
• Regional Roadshows
• Regional roadshows – Stage 1 is where you go to the country and target the local players and stage 2, once you have had success then bring them out to Australia to lock them in. It is a two-pronged approach. (5)
• Regional roadshows – we need to be active in the largest wine markets in the Southern hemisphere – Sydney / Melbourne / Brisbane. (15)
• Regional roadshows. (18)
• Regional roadshows. (20)
• Masterclasses
• Masterclasses and education and tastings for trade, including their staff – often we get the sommeliers and we don’t see how they teach their staff to sell our wine. (2)
• More consumer Masterclasses in South East Asia specifically China. (3)
• Trade masterclasses are important – the trade are the gatekeepers where wines get accepted and if the trade picks up wine. They become the ambassadors for restaurants and the more education there is directed towards trade, the more awareness and penetration into the market you get. (11)
• Trade masterclasses in different markets. (14)
• Masterclasses – there is still a place for that, particularly Singapore likes that engagement. (13)
• Trade masterclasses. (16)
• Masterclasses – in market and out of market can be effective tools if they are done right. (18)
• Education, and tastings
• Getting in front of the gatekeepers –trade masterclasses and trade education masterclasses, social media campaigns are also important about wines of WA. The rest you should be able to do yourself. (4)
• Education – wine education if you go to China educate use wine educators to host tastings and masterclasses. (20)
• Coordinated regional retail and on-trade promotions
• Coordinated retail and on trade promotions – trying to increase awareness mainly with channels actively selling your product and convincing consumers, inbound and outbound. I found incentives work well from our work with The Ivy. (11)
• Coordinated region retail and on-trade promotions – inbounds and social media campaigns and access to databases for EDM blasts. (14)
• Coordinated regional retail and on-trade promotions. (10)
• Coordinated retail and on trade promotions. (16)
• Regional retail and on-premise promotions are interesting and we should do more of those. (17)
• Coordinated regional retail and on trade promotions have worked well for our region. (20)
• Funding for on premise activation has always proved worthwhile. (13)
• Distributor incentives
• The biggest thing is providing carrots we can use to be competitive in some markets – what can we use as incentives that can be assisted by government to wineries e.g. in the UK market freight is our biggest thing, why take Australian wine over there when they can get other wine cheaper. If we can get an importer in Scotland or UK and get them to commit to 4 brands from WA and have some real incentivisation to do it. It comes back to money, whether distribution driven or if pitching it distribution on volume if they order we say we will give them x dollars as an incentive. Wines Victoria did it in the US; I am not sure how they did it
but apparently if they buy 500 cases they get a $10,000 cheque and sales in the US skyrocketed in 3 months. That is where we need to be better at it. To be honest buying headspace with customers, target an online business like Costco in the US who are massive and they pay reasonable dollars and do good volume; target 6 regional buyers to do a feature and take a more commercial approach. Wines Italy drop in a lot of money to buy the market. Wines of South Australia do deals with Virgin UK, when they look at Australia they are not interested in discussion with Wines of WA as others put a bigger carrot in front of them. (5)
• Individual distributor incentives. (10)
• Distributor incentives – I doubt their effectiveness unless you are already in the market and they are very targeted, otherwise they do nothing for you. (7)
• Individual distributor incentives. (20)
• Market entry programs
• Market entry programs are important and again with a follow up program and repetition in building that market year on year. (2)
• Market entry programs. (10)
• More new to market opportunities breaking into new markets – they are effective from an export perspective. (14)
• Regional marketing and sales assets
• Assist with providing businesses with imagery and video and content – smaller wineries can’t do that, provide a WA story on video that can be shared by all to use. (5)
• Development of regional marketing and sales assets is a priority, we need to have this ongoing as other wine regions have been highly active and consistently versus never for WA. (15)
• Development of regional marketing and sales assets could include regional branding. (17)
• Development of regional marketing and sales assets – telling the story and if for example there is an inbound wine mission from China have a translator funded or information in Mandarin as you need ability to convert to their language. (18)
• Social media
• There are always benefits in ongoing marketing and campaigns with wine influencers as part of a social media plan into target markets. (1)
• Media campaigns using social media are important – it is obvious some people look elsewhere for advertising and awareness. (2)
• Social media - the Asia on off program used some of that for a social media campaign, they put together the content and we also used some ourselves. (13)
• Social media campaigns. (10)
• Social media is a marketing driven campaign around WA wines – we are starting to do that on the domestic front, that regionality awareness would help and underpins other things we are doing. (7)
• Distributor/ Buyer matching
• I would like to see distributor buyer matching in Japan and Korea. (3)
• Distributor and buyer matching. (14)
• Distributor buyer matching – specific activities benefit from an awareness campaign and can deliver results. (7)
• Distributor buyer matching – internationally we need a distributor, and it makes export easier. (8)
• Distributor buyer matching. (20)
• Other
• Targeted access to southeast Asian hotel, retail and café chains and targeting high quality groups that can take volume and tell a premium story. (1)
• Support programs for international wine media such as James Suckling – bring him here to review everyone’s wines. It is a proven method of generating interest and sales. (3)
• We need to look beyond the individual and look at the greater good of the industry. (7)
• Overall it is a successful program, the fact it is going to also target the domestic market is a great opportunity. Export is hard and it takes time, effort and money which is hard to justify. It is easy to send 100 cases over east but to find an international buyer to take 100 cases is harder to achieve. Export by nature is more skewed towards large producers and the domestic market towards smaller producers. I would love to have a modest volume in several countries and get brand awareness. (7)
• Consumer focused events. (8)
• If there is anything outbound or support for me to do outbound work i.e. a subsidy to visit the Singapore market, then I would be interested. (9)
• Export market development grants; many years ago there was no direct support for export to travel and get into markets, it is a big cost outside of the program, even if you get a subsidised booth at a trade show, you still need to get there and pay to stay. It is a huge cost for us. The program has been around for 25 years and is designed to help access export markets and continue to grow it. The funding is only available for brand new exporters but if you want to grow markets there isn’t anything. The best people to grow the market is the people that are already exporting. It is a structural thing that is not helpful. (1)
• Feedback on inbound trade visits; we get people to visit our markets, but then there is a distinct lack of follow up communication with those people that came. How do we keep the conversation going with direct communication from wine producers? There is nothing from the program or the person. I would like the program to report say the most recent one where they brought journalists over they didn’t share articles or stories or promotions with us. It was left up to us to find articles, nor do we see what effect it has had on sales. It is hard to capture, I don’t want to necessarily know who got the sales but more so this number of wineries made a new distributor in an overseas market. (6)
• Ecommerce - the whole sector should be focused on getting sales portals and using a new way of doing business in Asia using key opinion leaders (KOLs) through a distributor in their own country to sell wine. We helped a honey business in Hong Kong using a company who employ a KOL to focus on products, they had bigger sales than anything else. A KOL (key opinion leader) is an influential individual on a social platform that consumers trust with purchasing decisions and popular opinions. They sit in a room, they taste honey but in this case wine and they do it via WhatsApp - people sit there and taste it at the same time and buy through WhatsApp or through that wine portal. They are doing it in South Australia, but it is not as sophisticated as it should be, and they are also trying it in Victoria. (16)
Do you have any other comments? Comments
• Working with other regions is important, from our point of view working closer with Margaret River region as the main export region could be improved. It is about being more collaborative in our strategic planning. (1)
• It is about trying to get people to agree and have a unified position is a challenge. I think you need to think more broadly rather than insularly. (1)
• Overall, it is good and moving in the right direction, we need to keep the momentum going and fine tune it. In the Porongurups we want the feeling that we get people here to hang on what we have, we want to do it properly we don’t want lots of people like Margaret River – we need to look at the big picture and be strategic. (2)
• I am surprised and glad they are getting feedback – no one ever does, no one sees the results of the work – it is great they are bothering to get feedback. (6)
• Negative
• If you hear the word Masterclass it makes me sick as we spend time and money and energy on that and half the time they are not interested. They are not the real buyers, that is our biggest problem which is getting past the gate keepers – they are commercial people. The challenges we have is about bringing the right buyers to Australia. (5)
• Distributor buyer matching doesn’t work - you find each other through other activities. (10)
• One of the producer gripes is that the cost for the programs in EGP has been too high – why cost $1000, it needs more subsidising to make it more attractive to producers in terms of financially for them to be involved. (20)
• I think there was always intention that there was a lot of consultant support at the beginning as industry was skilled up and over time the consultancy is reduced and the resources move to inhouse in the regions. I hope it is how it will play out with the next round of funding. I would like to see the regional associations run it. I think the program has been well received, it is great to see it expanding to include the domestic market and sustainability. (17)
• The program does need reviewing and I hope it highlights things that need doing. It is hard to find staff, why create more work. (19)
The Authors
Agknowledge®
Agknowledge® provides strategic management advice to a range of agribusiness companies and farming enterprises across Australia. Agknowledge® principals Peter Cooke and Nicol Taylor work nationally from a base in Western Australia, and combined they have over 75 years of involvement in agribusiness at all levels from strategic planning for agribusiness companies, government and industry policy, research, succession planning and business development.
Julia Ashby has worked with Agknowledge® since 2014 conducting one on one industry interviews on topics including: inland aquaculture opportunities, the value of grower groups, citrus industry consumer research, surveillance needs for invasive species, consultation for the WA Wild Dog Action Plan, and risk management in the Western Rock Lobster industry.
Our advice and contribution is informed by:
• Extensive specialist knowledge of key industry sectors and the issues that are driving operational and strategic change, a significant first-hand experience of working in roles with responsibility for strategic development, and the practical factors that may constrain the implementation of strategic initiatives.
• Government strategy development experience: Agknowledge® has completed many successful strategy and innovation engagements with government. We also bring practical experience of how to develop strategy in the government context.
• Industry and infrastructure experience. We draw on our team’s strong knowledge of regional industries as well as our numerous engagements in conducting industry analysis and building strategic business cases. Our robust analysis supports the qualitative perspectives, underpinned by strong analytical capabilities.
The related bodies corporate, directors and employees of Agknowledge® accept no liability whatsoever for any injury, loss, claim, damage, incidental or consequential damage, arising out of, or in any way connected with, the use of any information, or any error, omission or defect in the information contained in this publication. Whilst every care has been taken in the preparation of this publication Agknowledge® accepts no liability for the accuracy of the information supplied.
